JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)A short reply on behalf of Haryana Staff Selection Commission along with Annexures R-2/1 to R-2/3 has been filed in Court today and the same is taken on record. A complete copy thereof has been furnished to learned counsel for the petitioner.
With the consent of counsel appearing for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal today itself.
Petitioner is aggrieved of the action of the respondentCommission in not having declared her successful in the written examination conducted for the post of TGT (English) and against the ESM (General Category).
(2.)Brief facts that may be noticed are that an advertisement dated 23.07.2015 was issued by the Commission inviting applications for recruitment of 694 posts of TGT (English). 49 posts were reserved for ESM (General Category).
Petitioner stating herself to be eligible applied for the post of TGT (English) in the ESM (General Category). The written examination was conducted on 07.02.2016. Such written examination was in the nature of an objective type test in which OMR sheets were to be given to the prospective candidate and against each question there were four options and out of which the candidate was to opt for any one.
(3.)It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the question paper and one copy of the OMR sheet was permitted to be retained by the candidate after conduct of the examination. That apart, even the answer key in relation to the question paper/OMR sheet was also supplied.
Counsel would submit that as per calculations done by the petitioner by co-relating her response in the OMR sheet with the answer key, she would have secured 106 marks. In the result that has been declared on 03.09.2016, the last candidate called for the interview against the ESM (General Category) has secured only 68 marks and as such, there would be no justifiable basis to deny to the petitioner participation in the selection process i.e. for the interview.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.