Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

25. The Apex Court, in K.Channegowda & Ors. Vs. Karnataka Public Service Commission & Ors., (2005) 12 SCC 688, has laid down that scaling can be applied at certain level where variation in marks is plus or minus and plus or minus 20 or more as all the candidates did not get the benefit of moderation. The Apex Court has laid down thus:-

43. Another aspect of the matter is with regard to applying the scaling method as per the direction of the High Court. The scaling method has been described earlier in this judgment. The selected candidates have a grievance against the application of this method. It was submitted that it may not be proper to apply the scaling method only in respect of subjects where the answer scripts have to be moderated by Head Examiner/Chief Examiner and not to other subjects where the High Court has upheld the moderation/ random checking by the Head Examiner/Chief Examiner. We have given the submission our serious thought. The scaling method is applied only with a view to maintain a uniform standard in the marking of answer scripts. As is well known some answer scripts are randomly taken up for evaluation by Head Examiners/Chief Examiners. It may be that some examiner may be very liberal and generous in awarding marks whereas some other examiner may award much less marks for the same quality of answer. Upon moderation, no doubt the candidate whose answer paper is moderated gets benefit of moderation, but such benefit is not extended to other candidates whose answer scripts may have been examined by the same examiner, but were not randomly selected for re-evaluation by the Head Examiner/Chief Examiner. It is true that there is bound to be some difference in the marks awarded by different examiners in the same subject. But the need for applying scaling method arises only in cases where the variation in marks awarded exceeds a certain level. It is, therefore, not necessary that the scaling method should be applied in all cases. The scaling method will be applied only where the variation in marks is plus or minus a certain level or percentage. The High Court in the instant case has directed that scaling method shall be applied only when it is found that average variation is plus or minus 20 or more. Wherever the average variation is less than plus or minus 20, general review of the marks awarded need not be done. We were told that the scaling method is now being applied in many competitive examinations held in this country and the purpose of applying the scaling method is to bring about a certain uniformity of standard in the matter of award of marks by the examiners. No exception can be taken to the scaling method in principle.
44. In fact this Court in U.P. Public Services Commission vs. Subhash Chandra Dixit and others : AIR 2004 SC 163, has found the scaling method to be fair since it seeks to eliminate the inconsistency in the marking standards of the examiners. This Court has observed:-
"There is a vast percentage difference in awarding of marks between each set of examiners and this was sought to be minimized by applying the scaling formula. If scaling method had not been used, only those candidates whose answer sheets were examined by liberal examiners alone would get selected and the candidates whose answer sheets were examined by strict examiners would be completely excluded, though the standard of their answers may be to some extent similar. The scaling system was adopted with a view to eliminate the inconsistency in the marking standards of the examiners".

45. Then remains the question as to whether it will make any difference in the instant case if the scaling method is not applied to subjects where valuation and revaluation has been upheld by the High Court. In our view, it will make no difference because the High Court has not found it necessary to direct re-evaluation of answer scripts in those subjects where the average variation was not found to be more than plus or minus 20%. Thus, the subjects in which the High Court has not directed re-evaluation are those subjects where in any case the scaling method would not be applicable because the average variation of marks has been found to be within the prescribed parameter. We, therefore, uphold the direction of the High Court to apply the scaling method in re-evaluation of answer scripts pursuant to the order of the High Court.

28. The Apex Court, in Sadananda Halo & Ors. Vs. Momtaz Ali Sheikh & Ors., (2008) 4 SCC 619, has held that validity of recruitment could not be judged on the basis of microscopic details. It was also not proper to get sample survey of successful/unsuccessful candidates done through judicial officers. The court has to decide on the basis of pleadings of the parties. A roving enqiury cannot be made by this Court.

29. When we consider the submission raised by the counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that absurd results have been caused due to application of the scaling method, chart which has been placed for consideration, indicates that the person who has obtained less than the average marks had been awarded marks in proportion and the person who has obtained higher marks, his marks had been reduced by applying the scaling method. There is consistency in the method of scaling which has been resorted to. The Committee which was appointed by this Court has also found on fact that the formula of scaling used is correct and the same scaling has been applied for each subject. Same scaling has been applied for each examiner. No calculation mistake was found while operating formula.