SUBHASH CHANDRA PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution have been filed for quashing the result of U. P. Combined State/Upper Subordinate Services Examinations, conducted by U. P. Public Service Commission in the years 2001 and 2002. In Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 31362 of 2002, the main challenge is to the preliminary examination of the year 2002 and in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 31179 of 2002, the challenge is to Mains examination conducted in the year 2002. A further prayer has been made that the U. P. Public Service Commission be directed to declare the result of the aforesaid examinations on the basis of actual marks secured by the candidates without applying the formula of scaling.

(2.) The U. P. Public Service Commission (for short Commission) conducts an examination known as U. P. Combined State/Upper Subordinate Examination for the purpose of selecting candidates for Provincial Civil Services and Allied services and also for Upper Subordinate services. The examination is held in three stages, namely, Preliminary Examination, Mains Examination and Interview and, thereafter, a final list of selected candidates is prepared. Since the number of candidates who appear in the examination is very large Initially a preliminary examination is held which has one paper of general studies of 100 marks and one optional paper of 300 marks. There is a choice of 22 different optional subjects. The candidates, who qualify in the preliminary examination, appear in the Mains examination which is of 4 compulsory papers and 4 optional papers. For optional papers, there is a choice of 33 different subjects. On the basis of marks secured by the candidates in this examination, a small number is called for interview and thereafter a final list of selected candidates is prepared. The petitioners in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 31362 of 2002 did not qualify in the preliminary examination conducted in the year 2002 and were not declared successful for the purpose of appearing in the Mains examination. In Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 31179 of 2002, the petitioner Dharmendra Prasad Singh had qualified in the preliminary examination of 2001 and, as such, he was allowed to appear in the Mains examination. However, he did not qualify in the said examination to be called for interview.

(3.) It is averred in the writ petitions that the Commission applied a system of scaling to scale the marks awarded by the examiners who examined the copies. In this process of scaling the marks actually awarded by the examiners who examined the copies was completely changed, high marks of bright candidates were reduced and the low marks of poor and mediocre candidates were enhanced. The main ground for assailing the result of the examinations is that the same has not been prepared on the basis of actual marks awarded by the examiners but on altogether different marks which had been arrived at by a process of scaling.