Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia, J. - (1.) This present judgment shall dispose of 10 writ petitions i.e. CWP Nos. 2634, 2611, 2689, 2622, 2793, 2796, 2813, 2980, 3331 and 3193 of 2016 as common questions of facts and law are involved in all the writ petitions. For reference, CWP No. 2634 of 2016, Shweta Jaswal and another v/s. State of Punjab and another is being taken up.
(2.) The petitioners, in the present bunch of cases, seek the quashing of the answer to question No. 10 of booklet series A in Paper II of Civil Services Aptitude Test (CSAT) as declared by the Punjab Public Service Commission vide its result dated 05.01.2016. Reliance is placed upon the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No. 858 of 2016, Arashjit Singh and others v/s. State of Punjab and another decided on 03.02.2016. Resultantly, the benefit of such correction and for declaration of results on the basis of correct answer and to revise the list of shortlisted candidates for the main examination, which is scheduled to be held in March, 2016, is prayed for.
(3.) It is a matter of record that regarding the above said question, this Court had granted the benefit to the petitioners in CWP No. 858 of 2016, Arashjit Singh and others v/s. State of Punjab and another and CWP No. 1192 of 2016 titled Anil Sharma and others v/s. Punjab Public Service Commission. A finding was recorded that the answer of the said question No. 10 in booklet series A of paper II was option 'a' and not 'd'. The reasoning given was that there was a patent ambiguity and the question was based on the direction that the passage had to be read and the whole crux lay in the first paragraph which had to be taken into consideration by the candidate. The original record having been examined and the cutting of the opinion of the subject experts was one of the factors which led this Court to opine in favour of the said petitioners. The relevant portion of the reasoning given reads thus: - "Regarding question No. 10, as reproduced above, there is a patent ambiguity on the face of the record as the question itself talks about as to which of the following medium for the kind of education that writer "mentions in the first paragraph". The question was based on the directions given that a passage had to be read for answering the said question. The passage itself had 3 paragraphs. A description was given in all the 3 paragraphs wherein there was reference to exhibition, cine -film and filmstrip, which would help in visual education. The whole crux lies in the question itself whereby the relevance is attached to "the first paragraph" and therefore, what was in "the first paragraph" had to be taken into consideration by the candidates. The content of all the 3 paragraphs, on the basis of which, the Commission has opted for the correct answer as option 'd' was not to be the governing factor. For the said question, as per the original records, which were also called for since the Commission had itself placed on record photocopy of the opinion of the subject experts, even the subject experts themselves, firstly, had written 'a' and then, crossed it out and made corrections and made it 'd'. It is, thus, apparent that what the Court has opined and what the candidates are also suggesting that the correct answer is option 'a', the experts themselves were of the same opinion, though necessary corrections had been made, thereafter. In such circumstances, it is apparent that the benefit of question No. 10 reproduced above has to be given to the petitioners.";