LAWS(PAT)-1994-11-31

SURYA NARAYAN RAI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On November 11, 1994
SURYA NARAYAN RAI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed for a direction to the Bihar Public Service Commission to call the Petitioner for viva voce test on the basis of marks secured by him at the 37th Combined Competitive Examination. It is said that the candidates securing up to 574 marks were called for the viva voce but the Petitioner who secured 678 marks, has not been called. The basis of the claim is the marks-sheet, as contained in Annexure-2 said to have been communicated by the Commission to the Petitioner.

(2.) The Commission has filed a counter affidavit stating that the figures of marks, as shown in Annexure-2 have been interpolated and the document (Annexure-2) is forged and fabricated. Counsel for the Commission produced the original answer-books of the Petitioner of all the subjects. We are satisfied on the basis of the signature appearing on the vakalatnama and the affidavit that the writing in the said answer-books is that of the Petitioner himself. The marks shown on the answer-books as having been secured by the Petitioner are not the same as shown in Annexure-2. The following table will make the position clear.

(3.) It would appear that marks secured by the Petitioner in General Knowledge paper (38) and Labour and Social Welfare paper (58) have been made into 138 and 158 by adding prefix '1'. '0' has been made into '9' in the General Science paper to become 97 in place 07. In the Hindi language paper the first digit of the marks i.e. '2' has been erased and made into '4' and then pre-fixed by '1' to become 143 in place 23. Similarly, in the Sociology paper, the first digit of the marks '3' has been erased and changed to '4' and prefixed by '1' to become 142 in place of 32. No interpolation has been made in the General Hindi marks. But the reason is obvious. General Hindi marks is not added for the purpose of merit. Candidates are only required to secure the pass marks of 30. In this manner the Petitioner has interpolated the figures Annexure-2 and changed the total into 678 as against 158 marks actually secured by him.