AJIT PAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant-Ajit Pal Singh, an aspirant for the post of PCS (Ex. Br) and other allied services, whose examination was conducted in the year 2009, has preferred the instant intra court appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent, impugning the Judgment dated 23.01.2015 passed by Ld. Single Judge, whereby his writ petition was ordered to be dismissed. Ld. Counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued that in the instant case, the findings returned by Ld. Single Judge that there is no ambiguity in the marking of answer-book of the appellant and that the only over-writings that have been done, were on account of correction of an error, are patently and ex-facie wrong and untenable. It is submitted that a mere glance at the answer-book of the appellant in paper-I of Punjabi Literature would show that both the original marking/evaluation inside the answer-book and that on the cover page of the answer-book has been clearly and consciously tampered with. Consequently, the said tampering cannot be described as correction of an error. It is further argued that as per the "Instructions for the Evaluators and the Head Examiners" (Annexure P-14) prescribed by the Public Service Commission strongly negate and belie the defence put up by the Commission in its reply to the writ petition because as per clause 15 and 16, there should not be any cuttings and over-writings by examiners while evaluating the answer sheet. Finally, it is argued that re- evaluation of answer sheets can be allowed, in case there is apparent fraud being played upon the court, as is there in the instant case. Hence prayer has been made for allowing the instant appeal and order re-evaluation of questions.

(2.) Having heard Ld. Counsel for parties at length and scrutinized the paper-book with their able assistance, we do not find any error in the Judgment passed by the Ld. Single Bench. Admittedly appellant had qualified in the written examination and was called for interview. It is after having participated in the entire selection process, including interview, the petitioner has prayed for re- evaluation of his answer-booklet pertaining to paper-I of Punjabi Literature on the basis of cuttings and alterations made in the marks awarded to him in two questions. In such a situation, we are of the opinion that unless and until a clear cut case of fraud or malice is not made out, we cannot interfere in such an evaluation of the answer sheets. However, on perusal of pleadings and facts of the instant case, we are of the view that present case does not fall in such a category. A bare perusal of the pleadings in the writ petition would show that it is completely bereft of material particulars of fraud. It was incumbent upon the appellant to plead and demonstrate, without doubt, that he has been wrongly not selected on account of clash of interest with any examiner/ examining body, who did not want him to get selected; or that in order to accommodate some other candidate, appellant has been singled out. None of the said material particulars have been pleaded. Once that is so, we are afraid that the prayer made by appellant for re-evaluation on account of "fraud/ malice" is not made out.

(3.) Furthermore, it is evident from the record that the scheme of evaluating the answer sheets has a scientific/ logical backing, whereby a senior professors/Associate Professors of reputed University were assigned the role of examining particular questions, so as to have uniformity in checking, with the Head Examiner being the final authority to avoid skew- ness of marks. It would be beneficial to reproduce the relevant lines of paragraph no 5 of the preliminary submissions made by the Public Service Commission in its reply dated 1.10.2013: