Delhi High Court
Amit Kumar vs Union Of India And Anr. on 4 January, 2018
$~21 to 35.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 10501/2017 and CM APPL. 42975/2017
W.P.(C) 10532/2017 and CM APPL. 43108/2017
W.P.(C) 10533/2017 and CM APPL. 43110/2017
W.P.(C) 10604/2017 and CM APPL. 43423-424/2017
W.P.(C) 10636/2017 and CM APPL. 43553-554/2017
W.P.(C) 10638/2017 and CM APPL. 43583-584/2017
W.P.(C) 10641/2017 and CM APPL. 43590-591/2017,
W.P.(C) 10642/2017 and CM APPL. 43593-594/2017,
W.P.(C) 10643/2017 and CM APPL. 43602-603/2017,
W.P.(C) 10644/2017 and CM APPL. 43604-605/2017,
W.P.(C) 10647/2017 and CM APPL. 43613-614/2017,
W.P.(C) 10661/2017 and CM APPL. 43636-637/2017,
W.P.(C) 10662/2017 and CM APPL. 43638-639/2017,
W.P.(C) 10663/2017 and CM APPL. 43640-641/2017 and
W.P.(C) 10668/2017
AMIT KUMAR .....Petitioner
ASHOK KUMAR YADAV ..... Petitioner
MANOJ KUMAR YADAV ..... Petitioner
DEEPAK ..... Petitioner
RAMPAL ..... Petitioner
PRAVEEN KUMAR ..... Petitioner
HEMANT KUMAR ..... Petitioner
DINESH KUMAR ..... Petitioner
AMIT KUMAR ..... Petitioner
NAVEEN KUMAR ..... Petitioner
SUNIL KUMAR ..... Petitioner
GOVIND SHARMA ..... Petitioner
VIKASH SINGH ..... Petitioner
SANDEEP ..... Petitioner
RAHUL ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Dibya Nishant and
Mr.Gautam Mann, Advocates.
versus
W.P.(C) 10501/2017 & connected matters Page 1 of 5
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, Advocate with
Mr.Hem Kumar and Ms. Simmee Kumari,
Advocates in W.P.(C) 10501/2017, W.P.(C)
10532/2017, W.P.(C) 10636/2017, W.P.(C)
10638/2017, W.P.(C) 10647/2017, W.P.(C)
10661/2017 and W.P.(C) 10662/2017 .
Ms. Kailash Golani, Advocate in
W.P.(C) 10533/2017, W.P.(C) 10604/2017,
W.P.(C) 10641/2017, W.P.(C) 10642/2017,
W.P.(C) 10643/2017, W.P.(C) 10644/2017,
W.P.(C) 10663/2017 and W.P.(C) 10668/2017
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI
ORDER
% 04.01.2018
1. The petitioners have approached this Court for seeking directions to
the respondent No.2/BSF to declare them as successful in the typing test
conducted for the post of Head Constable (Ministerial) in BSF 2016-17, if
found to have attained the cut off marks.
2. The plea of the petitioners is that they had applied for the subject post
and had cleared the written examination conducted by the respondents.
Thereafter, they had appeared for the typing test on 12.09.2017 and as per
the results declared by the respondents on the spot, they had failed to clear
the said test.
3. The common grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent
No.2/BSF did not evaluate their typing results by following the procedure of
key depression per hour (KDPH), as declared in para-4 of the advertisement
dated 23.11.2016.
4. In view of the stand taken by the petitioners, on the last date of
hearing, learned counsel for the respondents had sought time to obtain
instructions from the Department and inform the court as to whether the
results declared in respect of the petitioners had been calculated in
accordance with the key depression per hour method (KDPH).
5. Today, Mr. Sabharwal, learned counsel for the respondents hands
over a set of documents and refers therein to the Standard Operating
Procedure (SOP) for recruitment to the subject post, as issued by the
Directorate General, BSF which states in para 7.2 (ii) (B) as follows :-
"7.2(ii)(B) TYPING TEST FOR HC(MIN)
To assess the speed of 35 words per minute in English or 30
words per minute in Hindi, a passage of 600/500 words in
English/Hindi respectively (Typed in double space) is given for
typing for 10 minutes. (35 w.p.m. and 30 w.p.m. correspond to
10500 KDPH/ 9000 KDPH on an average of 5 key depressions for
each words). Then total words typed out and mistakes therein will
be worked out as per details given below:-
(i) If any word is missing, it will be treated as a mistake.
(ii) If the words are repeatedly typed out at his own, it will be
treated as only one mistake. However, such words will not
be counted while calculating the speed.
(iii) If additional words have been typed out or wrong spellings
have been typed out or the typed words differ from the test, it
will be treated as mistake.
(iv) If a word or a part thereof has been typed out of line it will
be treated as mistake.
(v) If an alphabet (particularly at the end of the line) is mixed
up, it will be treated as mistake.
(vi) If not space has been given for each word or the space has
been given un-necessarily, it will be treated as a mistake."
Note (i) An instructions on call letter/admit cards for 2 nd phase
examination for the candidates for the posts ASI(Steno)/HC(Min)
may be given that Willing candidates for the posts
ASI(Steno)/HC(Min) may bring their personal Keyboards (USB)
and Mouse for Transcription of shorthand passage/Typing Test.
Note (ii) 10% mistakes are allowed. In other words if a candidate
types out 10% mistakes or less, full marks will be given taking in
view the portion of material typed by him. For excess mistakes, 10
words for each mistake will be subtracted from the total words
typed out. Example for determining the Speed:-
Total words typed out in 10 minutes : 400
Total mistakes : 45
Less 10% mistakes allowed : 40
Balance : 05 mistakes
Total speed : 400-50 (5x10)
: 350 words
: 350 divided by 10
minute.
= @ 35 w.p.m.
Note (iii) Typewriting and shorthand test may continue for next
date(s) according to number of candidates and availability of
Computers.
Passage of typing paper and typed papers (should be printed
out) of candidates should be withdrawn immediately from the
candidates after completion of their typing test and it should be
ensured by all board officers that, they are not taken out of the
examination hall at any circumstances. Similarly all shorthand test
papers of the candidates tested for the post of ASI(Steno), should
also be collected immediately after the test.
Authority competent to detail B.O.O., will also make
arrangements for maximum number of Computers alongwith its
accessories, printer, Computer stationary and other Adm. back up.
The computers for the test must have maximum Hindi fonts
installed in it and bilingual (English/ Hindi) Keyboards.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that not only has the
procedure of key depression per hour (KDPH) been followed for evaluating
the typing results of the candidates, the respondents have also worked out
the mistakes committed in terms of para 7.2 (ii) B of the SOP. He also refers
to a certificate dated 18.12.2017, issued by the Dy. Inspector General, SHQ,
BSF, SGNR, that declares that the typing test papers of candidates during
the 2nd phase examination for recruitment to the post of Head Constable
(Ministerial) in the BSF held at Jodhpur between 11.09.2017 to 16.09.2017,
were checked up as per the instructions set out in the Standard Operating
Procedure (SOP) dated 18.09.2014, circulated by BSF.
7. The only clarification this Court had desired from the respondents was
with regard to the method followed by them for calculating the results of the
typing test and state as to whether the same was in terms of the
advertisement dated 23.11.2016. Now that learned counsel for the
respondents has clarified that the results of the typing test for which the
petitioners had appeared in the Jodhpur region were calculated in
accordance with the KDPH method, as set out in para-4 of the advertisement
dated 23.11.2016 and the Standard Operating Procedure laid down for
assessing the typing test of the candidates, nothing further survives for
adjudication in the present petitions.
8. The present petitions are accordingly disposed of alongwith the
pending applications.
HIMA KOHLI, J
PRATIBHA RANI, J
JANUARY 04, 2018
na/ap
