BALDEV SINGH Vs. HIGH COURT OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In pursuance to an advertisement borne in Anexure P-1, the writ petitioner, applied for the post of a Clerk. However, he failed to qualify the written test. Subsequent to his failing to qualify the written test conducted by the respondent, for hence filling up the advertised vacancies, he proceeded to, through the instant petition, seek an order for quashing of the process(s) initiated for filling up the advertised posts.

(2.) Be that as it may, he has prayed that the respondent be directed to display the key answer sheets in respect of the relevant test conducted by the respondent. The initial relief aforesaid canvassed in the instant writ petition, does not warrant its being countenanced, tritely for the reason (a) given the writ petitioner apparently, not, making any ascription of any active malafides vis-à-vis the respondents, nor his making ascription of proactive malafides vis-à-vis the evaluator(s) of the apposite answer sheet, (b) Predominantly also his not imputing any active specific malafides vis-à-vis the evaluators concerned, comprised in theirs proceeding to not assess the petitioner vis-à-vis his correctly ticked choices of multiple choice question(s), nor obviously theirs' awarding marks with respect to correctly ticked choices, vis-a-vis respective specific queries, thereupon the evaluator(s) concerned mis-assessing his answer sheets. Moreover, at this belated stage, given the vacancies being filled up, also all the selected candidates receiving appointment letters, besides theirs joining the relevant posts, thereupon it would be insagacious to hence proceed to nullify the entire exercise.

(3.) Moreover, the relevant Rules do not hold any prescription(s) vis-à-vis the respondent being peremptorily enjoined to display the key answers in contemporanity to display of result(s) of written test(s). Even if the aforesaid Rules do not exist, may be, the canon(s) of transparency(s) may yet enjoin the respondent concerned, to, make display(s) thereof especially in contemporanity with the display of result(s) of written test, nonetheless, for this Court being enjoined to hold that hence there was no visible infraction vis- à-vis canon(s) of transparency(s), yetenjoined erection of the apt relevant evidentiary strata, comprised in attribution of aforesaid active specific malafides, vis-à-vis the evaluators.