Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

This Court while admitting the Writ Petition on 22.08.2017 directed the respondents to evaluate the OMR sheets of the petitioners and declare their results. It was also stated that if the petitioners were within the zone of consideration for writing the main examination, they should be permitted to write the main examination on 28.08.2017 and also on 04.09.2017.

The second respondent filed W.V.M.P.No.4555 of 2017 seeking vacation of the said order stating that the first petitioner wrongly bubbled both the circles of A and B against the place provided for bubbling the question booklet series in the OMR sheet and there is no evidence of whitener against both the circles and it is invented for the purpose of Writ Petition. The other allegation that the candidate who was supposed to sit before her was absent on that day was also false, as she was present and she was given question booklet series D. The Invigilator also submitted a report stating that before commencement of examination she demonstrated the procedure for filling up and bubbling the circles of OMR sheet. In respect of the second petitioner, she did not bubble any circle against the space provided for bubbling the question booklet series in the OMR answer sheet, but she also raised a similar allegation in the present Writ Petition which is not correct. It is also stated that a sample OMR answer sheet was also placed in the Commissions website for the purpose of candidates convenience, so that they can practice on the sample OMR answer sheet before going to the examination. Paras 8 and 9 of the instructions to the candidates makes it clear that the encoding or bubbling in the original OMR sheet would be final and no claim would be entertained. It was also clearly stated that forgetting to bubble any code will not entail the valuation of answer scripts. It was also stated that when similar matters came up before the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, the applications were dismissed and the said order was confirmed by this Court in W.P.No.20088 of 2003. When the matter was carried to the Honble Supreme Court in S.L.P(C) No.1300 of 2004, the same was dismissed on 13.02.2004.

Now it is stated that the petitioners were qualified in the preliminary examination and appeared for the main examination also, but the results of main examination were not declared in view of the pendency of the Writ Petition.

W.P.No.34025 of 2017 was filed by a candidate who appeared for the recruitment test to the post of Physical Education Teacher in the Residential Educational Institution Societies. The notification was issued on 14.04.2017 and test was proposed to be held on 17.09.2017 and 18.09.2017. The process of recruitment comprises of only one written examination which was to be held in two papers i.e., paper-I and paper- II. The examination was held on 17.09.2017 and 18.09.2017 for Papers I and II respectively. She appeared for the said examinations and the key was released on 05.10.2017. But, she states that while answering paper-I on 17.09.2017, while filling up of her personal details in the OMR sheet, due to examination tension she wrongly filled up her roll number in the row pertaining to figure 0 as well as 1. Thus, she blackened two bubbles instead of one bubble with respect to figure 0. She realized the said mistake at the end of the examination and requested the Invigilator to rectify the mistake. But, the Invigilator informed her that no correction would be permissible and if corrections are made the answer script would not be valuated at all. However, she correctly filled up the answer script while appearing for Paper-II. She submitted a representation on 21.09.2017 to the second respondent to condone the said mistake and when there was no response, she filed the said Writ Petition on 10.10.2017.

Thus, there is no dispute on facts and the second respondent has not filed any counter affidavit in W.P.Nos.34025 of 2017 and 37243 of 2017. The petitioners in W.P.No.26845 of 2017 and 37243 of 2017 appeared for the PGT and TGT examinations, whereas the petitioners in W.P.Nos.34025 and 40185 of 2017 appeared for the Physical Education Teacher examination. But, the point involved in these Writ Petitions relates to the mistake committed by the petitioners while bubbling the circles meant for Hall ticket numbers. Their case is not based on mistake in answering any question. It is also their common case that they entered the Hall ticket number manually in the box provided for the said purpose, but a mistake was committed in bubbling the circles. In the light of the above facts, it has to be seen whether the petitioners are entitled for any relief in the present Writ Petitions.

ii. Writes irrelevant matter, including the religious symbols, words, prayers or any communication whatsoever, in any place of the OMR answer sheet.

iii. Forgetting to bubbling Test Booklet Series, Paper Code, Hall ticket no. or Bubbling the other than your allotted test booklet code, other paper code, other Hall ticket no.

iv. If any type of tampering (rubbing the circles with chalk powder/scratching the circles with razors etc) is noticed will lead to invalidation of the candidature.