SHRI BHARAT SARING Vs. THE STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH
LAWS(GAU)-2018-1-126
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on January 08,2018

Shri Bharat Saring Appellant
VERSUS
The State Of Arunachal Pradesh Respondents

JUDGEMENT

AJIT BORTHAKUR,J. - (1.) Heard Ms. N. Danggen, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard S. Tapin, learned Senior Government Advocate appearing for the State Respondent No. 1 as well as Mr. N. Pada, learned Standing Counsel (APPSC) appearing for the respondents No. 2 and 3.
(2.) By preferring the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ petitioner has prayed for a direction for re-evaluation of his answer scripts in the subjects of General English, General Studies, Paper-II and Sociology, Paper-II in Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission Combined Competitive Examination (Mains), 2012 and for consequential benefits.
(3.) The writ petitioner has, interalia, contended that out of the various questions attended by the petitioner in the aforesaid examination, specifically the questions No. 5 (a) (VI), 5 (a) (IX), 5 (b) (IV), 5 (b) (III), 6 (a) (II), 6 (b) (II), 6 (b) (IV), 6 (c) (IV) of General English Paper and questions No. 10 (a) and 10 (b) of General Studies, Paper-II have not been awarded with any marks by one of the evaluators whereas, the evaluators were duty bound to give marks as per the correctness of the answers. In the result of the Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission Combined Competitive Examination, 2011-2012, 26 candidates were finally selected for appointment in various posts in categories of Group-A and B/other services as per their performance in the examination. According to the petitioner, the total marks obtained by the petitioner in the said examination being 904.41 marks are lesser than the total marks of the few selected candidates with narrow margin only. The petitioner has stated that had he been given marks in the aforesaid attended questions, he would have been selected in the final Selection List. Being aggrieved, the petitioner submitted a representation, dated 21.08.2012, before the respondent authority for re evaluation of the said answer scripts in which he appeared, but, the respondent authority has refused to address his grievances.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.