Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Jahan Ara And Others vs State Of J&K; And Others on 8 May, 2017
Author: Mohammad Yaqoob Mir
Bench: Mohammad Yaqoob Mir
Page 1 of 7
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR
AT SRINAGAR
SWP No.838/2017
MP No.01/2017
Date of Decision:08-05-2017
Jahan Ara & ors. Vs. State of J&K& Ors.
Coram:
Mr. Justice Mohammad Yaqoob Mir, Judge
Appearing counsel:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Mir Musavir
For the Respondent(s): None for R1.
Mr. Azhar-ul-Amin-for R2 & R3.
i) Whether to be reported
in Digest/Journal: YES/NO
ii) Whether to be reported
in Press/Media: YES/NO/OPTIONAL
1. Vide notification No.PSC/EXM/2016/52 dated
18.06.2016, Jammu and Kashmir Public Service
Commission (for short the Commission), invited
applications for the J&K Combined Competitive
(Preliminary) Exams, 2016 for filling up 277 vacancies with the following break-up:
a) Junior Scale of J&K Administrative Service =269
b) J&K Police (Gazetted) Service =02
c) J&K Accounts(Gazetted) Service =06 The last date for receipt of applications was 22.07.2016. Admittedly, 36681 candidates appeared in the preliminary examination.SWP No.838/2017 Page 2 of 7
2. Vide notification No.PSC/EXM/2017/22 dated 23.04.2017, result has been declared. In the proportion of 25 times of the total number of vacancies, 6925 candidates have been declared to have qualified for admission to main examination subject to determination of final eligibility at the time of submission of application forms for main examination. The last cutoff point has been notified as 270.477 marks out of aggregate 450 marks.
3. 62 candidates (petitioners herein) also claim to have appeared in the preliminary examination but do not figure amongst 6925 candidates who have been declared to have qualified for admission to main examination on the basis of their merit.
4. According to petitioners there were discrepancies in some of the questions which they were required to answer, in particular they have specified question No.43, 60 and 106 of the optional paper "Political Science". Out of 62 candidates (petitioners), 18 had optional paper "Political Science".
SWP No.838/2017 Page 3 of 7
5. Contention of the petitioners has been repelled as learned counsel for the respondent Commission has rightly pointed out that out of 36681 candidates 6952 made the grade, no mala fides whatsoever are attributed not alleged. In case petitioners would have secured more than 270.477 marks, they too would have figured in the list and in case, according to them, there was any discrepancy in any question, they, in terms of Rule 12A of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission (Conduct of Examination) Rule, 2005, as amended up- to-date, had a right to report to the Controller of Examination within three days commencing the day following the day of conduct of examination. The examination has been held on 19th March, 2016. The petitioners have not raised a little finger what to speak of filing any representation before the Commission. Now when result has been declared, they have started claiming that there were discrepancies in some of the questions, a bald and vague assertion because the petitioners are not specific except for question No.43, 60 and 106 of optional paper "Political Science". The petitioners with all calculation have participated and SWP No.838/2017 Page 4 of 7 were satisfied with the conduct of examination and now when result of preliminary examination has been declared, they have started raising questions which, in fact, is with a design to stall the selection process. No foundation at all has been laid for challenging the result of the preliminary examination.
6. The claim of the petitioners that they must have secured more than 300 marks out of 450 is simply an imagination. It is equivalent to a proverb "in case ifs were horses, everybody would like to ride". The aspirants are required to be satisfied with the results except, of course, any fraud or mala fide is discernible for which also there has to be an allegation and a complete foundation. Nothing of this sort is forthcoming from the perusal of averments of the writ petition. Petitioners cannot be permitted to challenge the process on the basis of imagination. In case they would have secured more than cutoff marks, there could be no reason for the respondent Commission for dropping them.
SWP No.838/2017 Page 5 of 7
7. It was next contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that as per Rule 12B as inserted in the Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission (Conduct of Examination) Rules, 2005 vide amendment notification dated 13.08.2015, the Controller of Examinations had to release the Key of question paper immediately after conclusion of the examination, further, Keys were to be uploaded on the website of the Commission which has not been done. This contention is also repelled by the learned counsel for the respondent Commission because Rule 12B, as inserted in the year 2015, has been amended and stand deleted vide notification No.07- PSC(DR-P) of 2016 dated 14.03.2016, copy of notification has been produced, same is taken on record. So the contention accordingly fails.
8. It was next contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondent Commission is neither providing OMR sheets nor position of merit of the petitioners. The respondent Commission is a body which has its own rules and regulations. In case petitioners have already represented or will further represent, same SWP No.838/2017 Page 6 of 7 has to be considered and decided by the Commission in accordance with its own rules and regulations.
9. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that he may be permitted to withdraw the writ petition with permission to file fresh one. This submission appears to be with some design. Unnecessarily litigative process and dragging of the process shall be impermissible. There is no cause projected or forthcoming which would persuade the Court to allow liberty to file fresh petition.
10. For the Combined Competitive Examination, system of selection as is in vogue in accordance with relevant rules and regulations is that the eligible candidates are permitted to apply. It is in the same background, 36681 appeared in the examination. Now the candidates in the proportion of 1:25 i.e. for 277 posts 6925 candidates have been provisionally admitted for main examination. After main examination are held, the candidates who qualifies will be called for viva and thereafter requisite number of candidates as per vacancy position will be selected.
SWP No.838/2017 Page 7 of 7
11. Preliminary examination, in effect, is a screening test.
The petitioners have failed to make the grade in the screening test. They should have prepared for second test whenever posts are advertised. It appears that they wanted that whole process is delayed, that too without having any ground what to speak of a solid or valid ground. Such type of litigation cannot be encouraged. Petition is totally without any merit. I was persuaded to dismiss it with heavy costs but since petitioners must be unemployed youth, therefore, no order as to costs.
12. For the stated facts and circumstances, petition is dismissed along with connected MP.
(Mohammad Yaqoob Mir) Judge Srinagar 08.05.2017 "Bhat Altaf"
SWP No.838/2017