Ashish Choudhary vs State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1233 MP

                                                                        1
                                                 The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                          WP No. 17387 of 2019
                                                  (ASHISH CHOUDHARY Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

                                     Jabalpur, Dated : 27-01-2022
                                            Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                            Shri Ashok Kumar Chakravarti, learned counsel for the petitioner.
                                            Miss Supriya Singh, learned counsel for respondent No.1/State.

Shri Siddharth Sharma, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4/MPPSC.

Heard on the question of admission.

Learned counsel for the petitioner by the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is raising grievance that after inspecting the answer-sheets of State Services Mains Examination, 2017 in pursuance to the order passed by this Court in W.P. No.9954/2018, the petitioner found some irregularities in valuation and, therefore, this petition has been filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that liberty has been granted by the Court in W.P. No.9954/2018 that if after inspecting the answer-sheets any grievance remains then the same can be raised by the petitioner by filing a

petition.

Shri Siddharth Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the other side i.e. respondent Nos.2 to 4/MPPSC has submitted reply and also raised objection with regard to maintainability of this petition. According to Shri Sharma, in pursuance to the direction of this Court, the petitioner was allowed to inspect the answer-sheets of State Services Mains Examination, 2017. He submits that as per the direction given by this Court, answer-sheets was to be retained only till inspection of the same, but thereafter those answer-sheets could be destroyed. He submits that even after inspecting the answer-sheets in the year 2018, this petition has been filed in the year 2019 that too without explaining the delay and looking to the urgency in the matter. He also submits that there Signature Not Verified SAN is no provision in the rule for revaluation or re-totaling of answer-sheets. He

Digitally signed by ANIL CHOUDHARY Date: 2022.01.28 11:57:05 IST

has placed reliance upon a judgment reported in (2010) 6 SCC 759 parties being Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission v. Mukesh Thakur and another, in which it is observed if there is no provision for revaluation or re-totaling, the same cannot be directed.

Considering the aforesaid and in view of the fact that this petition has been filed belately because after inspecting the answer-sheets, if any

irregularity is noticed by the petitioner in valuation, he should have immediately approached the Court, but without doing so and without explaining the delay he has filed the same. This petition even otherwise is liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.

In absence of any provision in the Rule, no direction can be issued by this Court for revaluation or re-totaling if answer-sheets. As such, this petition is without any substance and accordingly, it is dismissed.

(SANJAY DWIVEDI) JUDGE

ac/-

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ANIL CHOUDHARY Date: 2022.01.28 11:57:05 IST