LALIT MOHAN SHARMA Vs. RPSC AJMER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE basic determinates of the Constitutional conception of PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION (for short `rpsc') are impartiality and integrity. THE founding fathers of the Indian Constitution provided for a PSC at the Union as well as the State level, as an autonomous body to carry on its functions independently, fairly and impartiality. THEir Lordships of the Supreme Court in R/o Dr. Ram Ashray Yadav Vs. Chairman Bihar PSC (2000) 4 SCC 309 restated the morals of the PSC. It was indicated in para 34 thus:- " THE credibility of the institution of a Public Service Commission is founded upon the faith of the common man in its proper functioning. THE faith would be eroded an confidence destroyed if it appears that the Chairman or the members of the Commission Act subjectively and not objectively or that their actions are suspect. Society expects honesty, integrity and complete objectivity from the Chairman and members of the Commission. THE Commission must act fairly, without any pressure or influence from any quarter, unbiased and impartially, so that the society does not loose confidence in the Commission. THE high Constitutional trustees, like the Chairman and members of the Public Service Commission must forever remain vigilant and conscious of these necessary adjuncts. "

(2.) SINCE most sensitive standard of behaviour is expected from Rajasthan P. S. C. and its morals have to be tested in a much stricter sense than the morals of a common man in the market place, it is necessary for me to closely scrutinise the allegations levelled against the Rajasthan P. S. C. in the instant writ petitions that are more than 500 in number.

(3.) IN Kanpur University case (supra) their Lordships of the Supreme Court propounded thus:- " If a paper-setter, commits an error while indicating the correct answer to a question set by him, the students who answer that question correctly can not be failed to for the reason that though their answer is correct, it does not accord with the answer supplied by the paper setter to the University as the correct answer. The key answer should be assumed to be correct unless it is proved to be wrong and that it should not be held to be wrong by an inferential process of reasoning or by a process of rationalisation. It must be clearly demonstrated to be wrong, that is to say, it must be such as no reasonable body of men well-versed in the particular subject would regard as correct. Where it is proved that the answer given by the students is correct and the key-answer is incorrect the students are entitled to relief asked for. IN case of doubt unquestionably the key answer has to be preferred. But if the matter is beyond the realm of doubt, it would be unfair to penalise the students for not giving an answer which accords with the key answer that is to say, with an answer which is demonstrated to be wrong. IN a system of `multiple choice subjective type test', care must be taken to see that question having ambiguous import are not set in the papers. That kind of system of examination involves merely the tick-marking of the correct answer. It leaves no scope for reasoning or argument. The answer is `yes' or `no'. That is why the questions have to be clear and unequivocal. If the attention of University is drawn to any defect in a key answer or ambiguity in a question set in the examination, prompt and timely decision must be taken by the University to declare that the suspect question will be excluded from the paper and no marks assigned to it.