Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J. - (1.) Result of the Haryana Civil Services (Executive Branch) and Other Allied Services, Main Examination, 2014 was declared by the Haryana Public Service Commission (herein after to be referred to as the Commission) on 5.7.2016. Instant petition has been filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the Commission to prepare afresh/revise the result of the examination.
(2.) Mr. K.S. Khehar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the Main Examination consisted of three compulsory papers i.e. (i) Hindi and Hindi Essay (ii) English and English Essay (iii) General Studies and two more papers to be opted by the candidates out of 23 options available. Prayer in the present petition is founded on the premise that the Commission has failed to apply any standard statistical scaling and moderation procedure while evaluating the answer scripts so as to ensure parity amongst various optional subjects offered to the candidates. It has been vehemently argued that it was imperative for the Commission to have applied such standard tools of evaluation as the candidates had opted for different subjects and each subject had its own peculiarities. A level playing field could have been ensured between 23 optional subjects ranging from Mathematics to Hindi and Sanskrit Literature only if the marks obtained in each subject were to be adjusted to a common scale i.e. by way of scaling. It has also been argued that to achieve a fair and uniform evaluation the concept of moderation in evaluation should have been strictly followed so as to eliminate any chances of "examiner variability". Mr. Khehar contends that by not adopting the system of moderation and scaling there has been an infringement of Article 16 of the Constitution of India which otherwise guarantees that there shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. Action of the Commission is also stated to be in violation of the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sanjay Singh and another v. U.P. Public Service Commission, Allahabad and another, 2007 (1) S.C.T., 754 . Reliance has also been placed upon a Division Bench judgement dated 26.8.2011, passed by the Hon'ble Patna High Court in C.W.J.C No.3892 of 2011 (53rd to 55th Combined Competitive Examination Candidates Association and others v. B.P.S.C and others .
(3.) On behalf of the Commission Mr. B.R. Mahajan, learned Advocate General, Haryana duly assisted by Mr. H.N. Mehtani, Advocate have put in appearance. A short written statement on behalf of the Secretary, Haryana Public Service Commission has been filed. It is stated that the Commission had issued the advertisement for filling up 55 number of vacancies of Haryana Civil Services (Executive Branch) and Other Allied Services on 20.2.2014. The Preliminary Examination was held on 3.8.2014 and in which 12464 candidates appeared and the result was declared on 29.8.2014. 837 candidates i.e. 15 times the number of the advertised posts including bracketed candidates were declared qualified to appear in the Main Examination. The Main Examination was conducted by the Commission between 14.4.2016 to 20.4.2016 and 677 candidates appeared in such Examination. Result of the Main Examination was declared on 5.7.2016 and 166 candidates i.e. three times of the number of advertised posts including the bracketed candidates have been declared qualified for the Viva-voce/Personality Test, which has been scheduled between 22.8.2016 to 2.9.2016. Court has been apprised that question papers for the Main Examination were subjective in nature and set in bilingual i.e. in English and Hindi except the Language Paper. Each of the question paper set in bilingual was framed/drawn by a single paper setter. The candidate could attempt a paper in one language only i.e. either in Hindi or in English. As regards evaluation of answer scripts, it has been submitted that the answer scripts of respective papers were evaluated by one Examiner for each subject. The same Examiner evaluated the answer scripts attempted in both the languages i.e. in Hindi and English including the paper of General Studies. It was emphatically submitted that it was the paper setter who evaluated the answer scripts of the particular subject and thus was the Examiner as well. Learned Advocate General would contend that since the answer scripts of each paper i.e. compulsory as well as optional papers of the Main Examination have been got evaluated from one Examiner only and who also happened to be the paper setter, there has been no resort to the method of moderation or scaling. It has been contended that the Main Examination was held from 14.4.2016 to 20.4.2016 and there was ample time for evaluation of the answer scripts of the 677 candidates who had appeared in the Examination as the result was declared after a period of six weeks i.e. on 5.7.2016. There is stated to be no infringement of any legal or fundamental rights of the petitioners. Learned Advocate General prays for dismissal of the writ petition by submitting that the petitioners had duly participated in the process of selection and having been declared unsuccessful in the Main Examination, they cannot be permitted to turn around and to raise a challenge to any evaluation procedure having been adopted by the Commission. Court has also been informed that the method of scaling has not been adopted in any previous Haryana Civil Services (Executive Branch) and Other Allied Services Examination. Learned Advocate General submits that the present petition has been filed only with the objective to put a hurdle in the selection process which has reached at the final stage and out of a total of 509 candidates declared unqualified for the Viva-voce/Personality Test, it is only the present petitioners, nine in number, who have raised a grievance.;