SUNIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent No. 2-Uttarakhand Public Service Commission, Haridwar (hereinafter referred to as "Commission" for brevity) to include the Question No. 10 of the Question Booklet Series-A of the Preliminary Examination for the selection process of post of District Probation Officer and Case worker, as correctly attempted by the petitioner as per the option exercised by him, and accordingly, award the marks to the petitioner. The petitioner has further prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent No. 2-Commission to award marks to the petitioner and include his name in the select list, and call him for mains examination for the aforesaid post.

(2.) It is not disputed that the petitioner, an aspirant to appear in the recruitment of the District Probation Officer in pursuance with the advertisement dtd. 7/12/2021, i.e. Annexure No. 1 to this writ petition. He appeared in the preliminary examination, and he was declared unsuccessful. Now the case of the petitioner is that as far as Question No. 10 is concerned, he has given a correct answer, but the Commission did not accept the same. The particular question has two correct answers. The Commission took the decision that two answers of the said question are correct, hence, the mark for that question is equally divided among rest of the 99 questions.

(3.) A similar matter bearing Writ Petition (S/B) No. 290 of 2022 was list before us on 9/6/2022, wherein we have considered the matter and passed the following order:-