Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Rakesh Kumar vs Haryana Staff Selection Commission on 23 May, 2019

Author: Ritu Bahri

Bench: Ritu Bahri

CWP No. 8138-2019                                                           1


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH

                                C.W.P 8138 of 2019
                                Date of decision : 23.05.2019

Rakesh Kumar                                                         .....Petitioner

                                       versus

Haryana Staff Selection Commission                                   ...Respondent

CORAM:       HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:     Mr. M.S. Chahal, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

                    ****

RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral)

In the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking quashing of interview notice dated 10.02.2017 and 23.12.2018 (P-5 and P-12 respectively). Further prayer of the petitioner is for issuance of direction to the respondents to revise the answer key after correcting/making the right option is B instead of option No. A of question No. 55 in answer key in question Booklet of Set A on the basis of syllabus of NCERT Book and award the marks for question No. 19 and 55 in booklet for Set A to the petitioner.

It is not in dispute that earlier also CWP No. 2737-2017 titled as Sarita vs. State of Haryana and others was filed before this Court regarding questions being not correct. This Court on 13.11.2018 passed the following order in CWP No. 2737-2017:-

"Pursuant to direction given by this Court on 12.10.2018, today an affidavit dated 10/12.11.2018 has been filed in the Court, which is taken on record. As per affidavit, out of 20 questions, 15 have already been answered in favour of the petitioner in the 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 09-06-2019 23:07:46 ::: CWP No. 8138-2019 2 revised answer key. With respect to remaining 5 answers, 4 answers were found to be correct as per the report submitted by the expert committee and with respect to one question i.e question No. 19 in Set A, question No. 6 in Set B, question No. 57 in Set C and question No. 35 in Set D is concerned, the Commission forwarded the objection of candidates to 3rd expert and as per opinion of the expert, the correct answer of question No. 19 in Set A, question No. 6 in Set B, question No. 57 in Set C and question No. 35 in Set D is 'D'.
Since now all the objections of the petitioners have been decided by the Commission, this petition is being disposed of by giving a direction to the respondent-Commission to upload the revised result of the candidates, within a period of four days from today. After uploading the revised result, the candidates who falls within the zone of consideration, they be called for interview for the post of PGT History."

The grievance of the petitioner before this Court is that this Court had revised the answer key (P-11) but question No. 55 was not revised/corrected.

The petition is dismissed as this Court had no jurisdiction after the the Expert Committee gave its report after examining all the questions in detail, in view of judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in a case of U.P.P.S.C through its Chairman and another vs. Rahul Singh and another, 2018 (3) SCT

298.

May 23, 2019                                           (RITU BAHRI)
G Arora                                                   JUDGE
              Whether speaking/reasoned              Yes
              Whether reportable                     No



                                         2 of 2
                      ::: Downloaded on - 09-06-2019 23:07:46 :::