HEMANT KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD .

(2.) PETITIONER submitted his candidature for the post of Assistant Grade -3 (Steno -Legal Service Authority). He submitted his candidature pursuant to the advertisement, Annexure P -1. Shri Saxena submits that the petitioner appeared in the selection process and was required to take dictation. The typing sheet (Annexure P/4) shows that the petitioner has rightly typed the word ''fuank '' and ''ifjfuank '', yet those words were treated as wrongly typed and accordingly, numbers were deducted. The petitioner prays for revaluation, which was rejected by Annexure P -3. Shri Saxena submits that the action of the respondents is bad in law and a mandamus for revaluation be issued. He relied on : (2013) 4 SCC 690 (Rajesh Kumar and others vs. State of Bihar and others).

(3.) THE respondents have rejected the prayer of revaluation by order dated 11.9.2014 (Annexure P -3). The petitioner has not chosen to challenge this order in the relief clause.