Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Union Of India & Anr vs Ami Lal on 15 November, 2017
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Writ Misc Application No. 284 / 2017
In
D.B.Civil Writ Petition No.5692/2016
1. The Union of India Through the General Manager, North
Western Railway, Headquarter Office, Jawahar Circle, Jaipur.
2. The Deputy Chief Personal Officer (Recruitment), Railway
Recruitment Cell, North Western Railway, Power House Road,
Jaipur.
----Petitioners
Versus
Ami Lal Son of Shri Khamana Ram Prajapat, Resident of Village
Raiya Tunda, Tehsil- Taranagar, District- Churu (Rajasthan).
----Respondent
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s)-Union of India :- Mr.Kamal Dave
For Respondent-applicant :- Mr.K.R.Saharan
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMCHANDRA SINGH JHALA
Order 15/11/2017 Application No. 284 / 2017
1. For the reasons stated in the application the order dated 9.11.2017 is recalled since counsel wants to address argument notwithstanding reasons recorded in the said order.
2. The application is allowed.
D.B.Civil Writ Petition No.5692/2016
1. Since the respondent did not correctly mark the relevant circles in the OMR answer-sheet concerning his roll number, the answer sheet was rejected by the machine and thus he was awarded '0' marks.
(2 of 2) [WMAP-284/2017]
2. Vide impugned decision dated 27th January, 2016 the Tribunal has directed that for the small mistake the respondent should not suffer and thus a direction has been issued to evaluate the OMR answer-sheet. Noting that the appointments were made and there were no vacancies direction issued is to create a supernumerary post.
3. In the era of computerization and OMR answer-sheets used to award marks, it assumes importance for the candidates to ensure that the roll numbers are correctly indicated on the OMR answer-sheet by highlighting the applicable circle for the reason if there is any mismatch the optical reader would not evaluate the OMR answer-sheet.
4. The petition is disposed of setting aside the impugned order dated 27th January, 2016. Original application filed by the respondent is dismissed.
(RAMCHANDRA SINGH JHALA)J. (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG)C.J. Parmar