S JYOTIRANJAN Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is an unsuccessful candidate in the interview held by the Odisha Public Service Commission in the matter of Odisha Judicial Service Main Written Examination,2013-14 by filing this writ petition sought following relief(s):

(2.) Short back ground involved in the case is that the petitioner is a practicing lawyer, aspiring for the post of a Civil Jude in the Odisha Judicial Service applied against the post advertised and published by the opposite party no.2-Odisha Public Service Commission vide Advertisement No.24 of 2013-14. Petitioner appeared in the preliminary examination and remained successful in the said preliminary examination. Consequently the petitioner applied for second stage of the examination, namely, Odisha Judicial Service Main Written Examination. He appeared in the examination held from 4.8.2014 to 7.8.2014. Petitioner alleged that even though he has performed best and answered the questions right but unfortunately, the Examining Authority while awarding marks involving Question No.12 (b), (i), (ii) and (v), did not award any mark despite the answer being completely correct. Petitioner has specifically alleged that no marks were awarded even though answers were absolutely correct. In justifying his allegation, the petitioner has also specifically pleaded that looking to the illustrations provided by him in his pleading and referring to the test books indicated in his pleading, claimed that his answers against the above questions are most appropriate and in not awarding marks to the petitioner against these particular questions, the Examining Authority has not done justice to the petitioner. In so far as marking in respect of Question No.12 (b)(iii) and (iv) is concerned, the petitioner has alleged that even though the petitioner has given correct answer, the Examining authority instead of granting full 3 (three) marks against each of the above question, arbitrarily granted 2 (two) marks against each of the above questions. Under the aforesaid pleadings and submissions, the petitioner claimed the relief, as indicated hereinabove through his Senior Counsel Sri Ashok Mohanty.

(3.) Odisha Public Service Commission-opposite party no.2 while opposing the contentions and allegations raised by the petitioner, by filing a counter affidavit, submitted that recruitment to the post of Civil Judges in the Odisha Judicial Service is being regulated under the provisions contained in the Odisha Superior Judicial Service and Odisha Judicial Service Rules, 2007. Further the papers of the examination were evaluated by experienced examiners selected in consultation with the Hon'ble Chief Justice of the High Court following Rule 20 of the aforesaid rule and since the petitioner was unable to acquire required percentage of marks, as required under Rule 24, he was not selected for vivavoce test in the said recruitment process. It is contended by the opposite party no.2 that once the answer-sheets are evaluated by eminent Examiners, rechecked by the Chief Examiners and scrutinized by the Scrutinizers, the process in the written examination gets confirmed leaving no further scope for re-evaluation or re-calculation. It is also specifically contended that there is no provision/ practice for re-evaluation/re-calculation of any written examination on the request of the candidates. Under the above pleadings and submissions, Sri Pradipta Kumar Mohanty, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Odisha Public Service Commission contended that there being no scope for interfering in the matter, the writ petition should be dismissed.