Sujit Narayan Prasad,J. - (1.) The matter has been taken up through video conferencing.
(2.) The instant writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India whereby and whereunder direction has been sought for upon the respondents-JAC to issue fresh mark-sheet to the petitioner bearing Roll No. 16073282 showing him as qualified candidate in Level Class I-5 of Teachers Eligibility Test, 2012 conducted by Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi pursuant to Advertisement No. 95/12 or to re-publish the result of the petitioner on the basis of 1st answer-sheet issued by the Council and not on the basis of 2nd answer-sheet, in which, the petitioner will get 92 marks instead of 74 marks and further to give at least pass marks to the petitioner.
(3.) The brief fact of the case, as per the pleadings made in the writ petition, which requires to be enumerated herein reads hereunder as: The petitioner having adequate educational qualification of I.Sc. participated in the Teachers Eligibility Test (in short 'TET') Examination issued vide Advertisement No. 95/2012 by Jharkhand Academic Council and duly applied for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher in the district of Sahibganj. According to writ petitioner, as he comes under the category of Scheduled Tribe, having all required qualification, applied to the post of Assistant Teacher in the district of Sahibganj, whereupon the Jharkhand Academic Council issued Admit Card having Roll No. 16073282, in which, the petitioner appeared but after publication of result he was shown to be unsuccessful. It is further case of the writ petitioner that after the examination was conducted and before publication of the result, many candidates complained about wrong answers in the examination conducted by the Council, which was assured to be corrected in the 2nd answer-key but without publication of 2nd answer-key, result was pubished, in which, the petitioner was awarded 74 marks out of 150 marks and was declared disqualified as because passing marks of the category i.e. Scheduled Tribe, in which the writ petition falls, was 78 marks Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that respondents-JAC has not acted fairly as because even though certain answers of the questions have been found to be incorrect but instead of coming out with 2nd answer-key, the entire result has been published, which is not justified as when the academic council itself has come to the conclusion about incorrectness of some answers, then it was incumbent upon the council to come out with the second answer-key but having not done so the writ petitioner has been shown to have secured 74 marks while the writ petitioner was expected to get 92 marks. ;