B.B. Mangalmurti, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the order of learned First Court dismissing the writ application wherein the prayer was made to direct the respondent to consider the case of appellant for appointment on the post of Police Constable.
(2.) The learned Writ Court in W.P.(S) No.781 of 2012 has held as under:- 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length and on perusal of documents available on record, it appears that the petitioner scored well in physical test and a small push in written examination would have made him successful in the Constable appointment examination. But here the respondents have come up with a clear-cut case that out of the total candidates who appeared in the written test copies of 39 candidates have not been returned to the conducting authority by the candidates, hence they are unavailable. Besides, it has further been alleged that there are 8 candidates of whom 2-2 answer-sheets with same roll number have been detected and further 47 answer-sheets have been found which are incorrect/faulty. Furthermore, it is not only the case of the petitioner, whose result has not been published because of faulty answer-sheets but there are number of candidates who have been declared unsuccessful because of faulty/incorrect answer sheets. These are all disputed question of facts. 7. This Court cannot go into these disputed question of facts. Moreover, it is no more res integra that these disputed question of facts cannot be effectually adjudicated by the Writ Court. Therefore, the reliefs sought for in the writ application is thoroughly misconceived, illegal and unsustainable. 8. View of the Court gets fortified by the decision rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of City and Industrial Development Corporation Vs. Dosu Aardeshir Bhiwandiwala & Ors reported in, 2009 1 SCC 168. 9. Before parting with this order, I would like to say that I have very sympathy with this young candidate, who in his early twenties in search of bread and butter, with a firm belief and fond hope applied for the post in question, but did not get employment due to non-addition of marks in written test may be for the reasons as assigned by the respondents, but as stated above, this is all disputed question of fact and this Court cannot adjudicate such disputed facts and cannot adopt a "Accommodative approach" to show charity, as charity beyond established principle of law is cruelty to others.
(3.) Appellant being a candidate, who applied against an Advertisement No.1 of 2010 for the post of Police Constable in District Police. The appellant was issued admit card and was allotted Roll No.32778. The further case is that appellant appeared in the physical test as well as written test conducted by the respondentauthorities. He did not find his place in the list of successful candidates. He filed an application under Right To Information Act before the Superintendent of Police-cum-Chairman of Police Selection Board to provide marks obtained by him. Due to nonsupply of information, he filed an appeal before the Deputy Inspector General of Police, North Chhotanagpur Range, Hazaribagh to provide information under Right To Information Act and thereafter he received the information about the marks obtained by him in the physical test but the marks obtained in the written examination was not made available on the presumption that some answer sheets of Hazaribagh District are unavailable and in some of the answer sheets wrong Roll Number have been mentioned and in some of the answer sheets the Roll Number are not mentioned so it may be possible that some of these mistakes might have been committed by the candidates during the written examination.;