Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Rajasthan Public Service ... vs Bhanwra Ram on 24 November, 2021
Bench: Akil Kureshi, Sudesh Bansal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 399/2019
1. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its
Secretary, Rpsc, Ajmer.
2. The Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission,
Ajmer.
----Appellants
Versus
Bhanwra Ram S/o Nimba Ram, R/o Plot No. 3, Mahadev Nagar
Near Sai Bagh, On The Road Of Gokulji Ki Paou To Anganwa
Road, Mandore, Jodhpur.
----Respondent
Connected With
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1686/2018
Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary,
Rpsc Ajmer.
----Appellant
Versus
1. Jeevan Ram S/o Kasu Ram, Plot No. 47, Ram Bagh
Scheme Opposite Railway Station, Mahamandir Jodhpur.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of
Personnel And Training, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
----Respondents
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1897/2018
Raj. Public Service Commission, Ajmer, Through Its Secretary,
Rpsc Ajmer.
----Appellant
Versus
1. Neha Vaishnav D/o Satya Narayan Vaishnav, Manak
Chowk, Moti Bai Ka Mandi, Jodhpur.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of
Personnel And Training, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
----Respondents
(2 of 5) [SAW-399/2019]
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Tarun Joshi.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kailash Jangid.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order
24/11/2021
These appeals are filed by the Rajasthan Public Service
Commission to challenge the judgments of the learned Single
Judges passed in the respective writ petitions.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The record would suggest that the RPSC had conducted the
recruitment tests for the post of RAS and other allied services for
which advertisement was issued on 24.06.2013. The candidates
who cleared the screening test were subjected to main
examination. We are informed that close to 4,52,000 candidates
appeared at the initial stage, of which about 15000 candidates
qualified for the main examination. It is stated that during this
examination the Public Service Commission had introduced for the
first time, the procedure of supplying scanned copies of the
answer sheets of the candidates to the examiners. In the process
there were certain errors in the checking process. About 2900
candidates applied for the verified answer sheets under the Right
to Information Act, of which errors were found only in about 23
answer sheets of 19 candidates. These errors principally revolved
around omission to access certain answers of the candidates.
These errors were corrected and results were revised. Two of
(3 of 5) [SAW-399/2019]
these candidates improved their tally of marks so as to be
included in the select list.
The learned Single Judges while disposing of the petitions of
the unsuccessful candidates, have issued following directions:-
"This Court cannot shut its eyes to such an illegality
committed by the respondent-RPSC, which is casting
severe aspersion upon the selection process of the
State Civil Services, and therefore, the present writ
petition is allowed, while issuing the following
directions to the respondent-RPSC:
(i) The RPSC shall manually check all the copies of the
candidates, who had appeared in pursuance of the
advertisement dated 24.06.2013 for the post of RAS
and other Allied Services, and also, the merit shall be
re-determined, and while making necessary correction
in the mark-sheets of the Mains Examination, the
respondents shall publish the revised results within a
period of one month from the date of receipt of
certified copy of this judgment. After undertaking such
an exercise, if the petitioner is falling in merit, then he
shall be considered for appropriate appointment in his
respective category, strictly in accordance with law.
(ii) The examiners, who were assigned the work of
checking the answer scripts in the present recruitment
and have left the questions-answers unchecked in the
answer scripts of the candidates, as identified, would
be debarred from the examiner duties/expert duties,
or any kind of duties with the RPSC, for the next three
years.
(iii) A cost of Rs.15,00,000/- is imposed upon the
RPSC, which shall be deposited with the Principal
Secretary, Department of Personnel, Government of
Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan, within a period of one
month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this
judgment, who shall appropriately disburse the said
amount for the welfare of the poor students in the
Government Primary Schools of the State.
(iv) The compliance report shall be filed before this
Court within a period of two months. Though the file is
closed, but the compliance report shall be kept before
this Court on 07.11.2018."
In our view, these directions are required to be reversed for
the following reasons. Firstly, as pointed out, the Public Service
(4 of 5) [SAW-399/2019]
Commission was conducting the tests in which at the first stage
more than 4.5 lac candidates appeared. Secondly, in the written
main examination errors were detected in only 23 papers of 19
candidates, which were corrected voluntarily. Thereafter, to
subject every single paper to physical examination would add to
enormous burden on the administration, that too in the tests
which were conducted in the year 2013. None of the other
candidates except those who had filed these petitions, have raised
any grievance about their non selection. Imposing cost of Rs. 15
lac on the Rajasthan Public Service Commission was also
somewhat harsh. It is not the conclusion of the learned Single
Judges that there was any malafide on part of the administration
in conducting the tests. Even if there were some errors which
should not have happened, imposing such heavy cost was not
justified. Lastly, the direction of debarring the examiners, who
were responsible for such lapses permanently without hearing
them also requires some modification.
Eventually, while disposing of these appeals, the impugned
judgments, in so far as they direct rechecking of every single
answer paper and imposing cost on Rajasthan Public Service
Commission are reversed. With respect to the action that may be
taken against the erring examiners, we leave it upto the Public
Service Commission and it is expected of RPSC to conduct a
proper enquiry and if it is found that such lapses were on the part
of the erring examiners, it would be open for the Rajasthan Public
Service Commission to debar such erring officials for the period as
found advisable.
(5 of 5) [SAW-399/2019]
With these observations and directions, the appeals are
disposed of.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J (AKIL KURESHI),CJ
29to31-jayesh/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
