Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(c) to direct the respondents to include the petitioner's name in the Selection List for the post of Joint Director of Agriculture, Class-I, by rounding off the petitioner's 49.72 marks to 50 marks, and to give him appointment accordingly, with all the consequential benefits;
(d) to direct the respondents to exclude from consideration and calculation of merit the 5 (five) questions being Question Nos. 56, 136, 138, 142 and 278 of "A" series Question Booklet the answers whereof are uncertain, debatable and doubtful and for which GPSC had received several representations and GPSC even changed some of the answers in the Final Answer-Key declared by it, as referred to in the statement at Annexure-K, and to revise the Final Result accordingly and to select the petitioner and to give him appointment with all the consequential benefits;

NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4474/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/07/2025 undefined After receipt of the opinion from the experts, the final answer key was published on 10.05.2017. On 29.05.2017, the the final answer key was revised and published after following the due procedure. On 21.06.2017, the commission published a list of candidates for scrutiny of documents. After scrutiny of documents as per the norms, against 2 vacancies, total 12 candidates who are in order of merit, were declared eligible for interview and the result of eligible candidates for interview was published by GPSC on 10.11.2017. The interviews scheduled for the said post on 07.12.2017 and on 08.12.2017, the final result of interview was published and on 16.12.2017, recommendation sent to the concerned department of the government by Commission. 5.2 He has submitted that the petitioner applied for the said post in the General category and appeared in the preliminary test held by GPSC and the petitioner found his place in the list of eligible candidates for scrutiny of documents and accordingly the petitioner submitted relevant documents in prescribed time limit and after scrutiny of application the petitioner was called for interview and in the final result, the qualifying standard NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4474/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/07/2025 undefined decided by the Commission for the unreserved category was 50 marks and the petitioner got only 49.72 marks that is why he is not recommended for the said post and, therefore, he has submitted that there is no guideline or rule permitting the principle of rounding off marks in order to qualify for appointment and the petitioner had raised objections regarding provisional answer key for question Nos.133, 135, 142 and 276 and suggested answers. However, in the present petition, he has raised disputes to the answers of question No.56, 136, 138, 142 and 278 pertaining to series "A" Question Booklet and now, the petitioner is stopped from making any grievance with regard to final answer key which was published on 10.05.2017, and after that, revised final answer key was published on 29.05.2017. The petitioner appeared in the interview held on 07.12.2017 and declared unsuccessful candidate.