Shishir Kumar, J. - (1.) THE petitioner was one of the candidates for the police recruitment held by the respondents. According to the petitioner, 4 questions in part II and 2 questions in Part IV were not correct, therefore, the marks given by the respondents are not correct and their answer books may be re -examined. The Court has put a query to that effect to the Standing Counsel and today learned Standing Counsel has produced the instructions as well as the Judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 2669 (MB) of 2009, Pawan Kumar Agrahari v. Public Service Commission U.P and Ors. In the similar type of matter, the Division Bench of this Court has held that "Likewise in regard to the answers to the questions...the experts have given their report and have relied upon the noted authorities.
(2.) WE thus do not find merit in the challenge set forthwith by the petitioner. The writ petition is therefore, misconceived and is hereby dismissed." Further it is mentioned that due to incorrect questions in two papers, the marks of those questions have been included in the number of respective applicants and in spite of the aforesaid facts, if a candidate has not obtained cut of marks, then he has been declared unqualified. From the explanation given, it does not appear that any fault has been committed by the respondents while examining the answer books of the various applicants.
(3.) IN such circumstances, I am of opinion that this Court cannot become an examining body and therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioner.;