SAIFAN KHAN Vs. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that pursuant to an advertisement of 2018 for recruitment against 60 vacant posts of Stenographer, the examination was conducted. He would further submit that the petitioner in response to the advertisement filled up the application form, thereafter, the list of eligible and non-eligible candidates was uploaded in the website of the High Court of Chhattisgarh. Thereafter on 16.12.2018 as many as 373 eligible candidates appeared in the examination and after the examination the result was declared on 08.01.2019. Apart from the reserved category, the common merit list of 58 candidates, who secured minimum 50% marks in the skill test was declared, wherein 24 candidates were selected and 28 candidates were in the waiting list. The petitioner claimed his candidature for the unreserved category. He secured 67 marks; 36 in the written examination and 31 in the skill test and his name appeared at serial No.28 in the common merit list.

(3.) The counsel would further submit that though the advertisement was meant for 60 vacant posts but select list was issued only for 21 candidates. Since the petitioner was not happy with the marks given in the written test i.e. 36 out of 60, he sought his answer-sheet under the RTI. Petitioner's case is that question No.3 which carried 20 marks in total and each sub question carried two marks, thereby one who attempts one question and makes a simple sentence using one word then he would secure one full mark. The petitioner contends that he has attempted all the questions and framed the sentence as per question.