Allahabad High Court
Aayushi vs U P Public Service Commission And ... on 1 October, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2019 ALL 3010
Bench: Pankaj Mithal, Saral Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15728 of 2019 Petitioner :- Aayushi Respondent :- U P Public Service Commission And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahesh Sharma,Gaurav Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- M.N. Singh Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J.
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Mahesh Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.N. Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.
The petitioner appeared in the main examination of U.P. Judicial Service Civil Judge (Junior Division), 2018. She has not been successful and has not been selected.
She has filed this petition seeking a direction that her answer books of the main examination be reevaluated and supplied to her.
The prayer of re-evaluation of the answer sheets cannot be accepted in the absence of any provision in this regard which leaves us with the issue of supply or inspection of answer books.
The petitioner in support of the above submission has relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court dated 16th July, 2018 passed in Civil Appeal No. 6723 of 2018 Mradul Mishra Vs. Chairman U.P. Public Service Commission Allahabad and Another. The aforesaid decision opines that permitting a candidate to inspect answer sheet does not involve any public interest and nor does it even affect the efficient operation of the Government. The other issue such as that confidentiality of sensitive information have been dealt with in the case of Central Board of Secondary Education and Another Vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay and Others (2011) 8 SCC 497 and, therefore, the candidates are entitled to inspect the answer sheet subject to maintaining confidentiality of the examiner.
In the case of Union Public Service Commission and Others Vs. Angesh Kumar and Others (2018) 4 SCC 530, the Apex Court laid down that the marks of Civil Services Exam cannot be directed to be furnished mechanically but only where the Court finds that public interest requires furnishing of information, the Court can certainly direct for giving the information so required.
The above decision is only with regard to furnishing of information and not with regard to showing or supplying the answer books to the candidate.
In the case of Mradul Mishra (supra), the Apex Court has ruled that the candidates are entitled to inspect the answer sheets.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, as the petitioner is asking for inspecting the answer sheets of the main examination, we are of the opinion that petitioner is entitled to the same subject to maintaining of the confidentiality of the examiner. Accordingly a writ of mandamus is issued to the respondents to allow the petitioner to inspect the answer books on a given date which may be convenient to both the parties.
The writ petition stands disposed off.
Order Date :- 1.10.2019 Sattyarth