PRANAY KUMAR SONI Vs. CHAIRMAN UPSC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks re-assessment/re-evaluation of the answer-sheet of the petitioner in second paper of Commerce and Accountancy (Civil Services Main Examination) 2001.

(2.) The petitioner passed the preliminary Civil Services Examination on 20th May, 2001. He appeared in the main examination on 24th August, 2001. The petitioner was declared successful in the written examination and was called for interview on 9th April, 2002. The petitioner was interviewed but he was not selected. The total marks obtained by him were communicated to him after declaring the final result. The petitioner was awarded 75 marks in the optional one Commerce and Accountancy Paper (Code-II). The petitioner made a representation to the Union Public Service Commission hereinafter called UPSC with a request that second paper of first optional (Commerce and Accountancy) be re-checked/re-evaluated. The respondent/UPSC considered the representation-and confirmed that there was no error in the marks communicated of the petitioner. Hence trie present petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner has an outstanding academic record and had passed 10+2 Higher Secondary with distinction in four out of five subjects. He secured the first position in the State of Madhya Pradesh in Class-XII exam (commerce stream). The petitioner obtained 72% marks in the B. Com. He was also awarded a certificate of merit. Counsel contends that respondent No. 1 ought to have re-assessed/re-evaluated the answersheet of the petitioner keeping in view the fact that petitioner had secured good marks in all the other subjects in the main examination. The petitioner apprehends that his paper of Commerce and Accountancy had not been assessed/evaluated correctly in light of his past academic record. The respondent No. 1 ought to have acted with transparency and in a fair manner. The respondent No. 1 ought not to have rejected the representation of the petitioner in a summary manner and ought to have ordered re-evaluation/reassessment of the petitioner's answer-sheets in the peculiar facts of the case and keeping in view of the past-performance of the petitioner in the commerce and accountancy. The rejection was arbitrary and without application of mind.