Karun Kamini Rajput vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

In all these writ petitions an interim relief has been claimed to permit the petitioners to appear in the Main Examination of the State Civil Services

being conducted by the M.P. Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as “the MPPSCâ€​).

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that in identical petition â€" W.P. No.9659/2018 similarly placed candidates have been allowed to

appear in the Main Examination. It is further submitted that a challenge has been made to the correctness of the answers to the questions put up by

the MPPSC in the Preliminary Examination. It is submitted that the model key answer was published on 21-2-2018.

Learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the judgment passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in W.P. No.3561/2018

(Pooja Chandrakar vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) and other connected writ petitions. Reliance was also placed upon the Apex Court judgement

rendered in the case of Richal and others etc.etc. vs. Rajasthan Public Service Commission and others etc.etc. (Civil Appeal Nos.4695-4699 of 2018.

Objections were invited and the last date for submitting objections to the model key answer was 28-02-2018. Thereafter, final model key answer was

published on 12-03-2018 and the result of the Preliminary Examination was declared on 17â€"4-2018. It is further contended that the respondents have

changed five answers of the Model Key Answer. Five answers have been deleted and ten answers have been changed.

Learned counsel for the MPPSC submitted that the last date for submission of the forms for the Final Examination was 31-5-2018, which is already

over. It is further submitted that interim orders were passed by this Court prior to the last date of submission of the forms and now the portal has also

been closed by the MPPSC. It is further submitted that on merit, the petitioners have no case, as the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Nitin

Pathak vs. State of M.P. and others (W.A. No.581/2017, decided on 4-9-2017) has held that this Court does not and should not act as Court of

Appeal to take a different view than what has been finalised by an examination body. He also relied on the Apex Court decision rendered in the cases

of Ran Vijay Singh and others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, (2018) 2 SCC 357 and Pramod Kumar Shrivastava vs. Bihar Public Service

Commission, (2004) 6 SCC 714 to contend that in the matters of examinations there cannot be any re-valuation and also no interference can be made

by the Court in writ jurisdiction. He relied on paras 31 and 32 of the said judgment which are extracted hereunder:

“31. On our part we may add that sympathy or compassion does not play any role in the matter of directing or not directing re-evaluation of an

answer sheet. If an error is committed by the examination authority, the complete body of candidates suffers. The entire examination process does not

deserve to be derailed only because some candidates are disappointed or dissatisfied or perceive some injustice having been caused to them by an

erroneous question or an erroneous answer. All candidates suffer equally, though some might suffer more but that cannot be helped since

mathematical precision is not always possible. This Court has shown one way out of an impasse â€" exclude the suspect or offending question.

It is rather unfortunate that despite several decisions of this Court, some of which have been discussed above, there is interference by the Courts

in the result of examinations. This places the examination authorities in an unenviable position where they are under scrutiny and not the candidates.

Additionally, a massive and sometimes prolonged examination exercise concludes with an air of uncertainty. While there is no doubt that candidates

put in a tremendous effort in preparing for an examination, it must not be forgotten that even the examination authorities put in equally great efforts to

successfully conduct an examination. The enormity of the task might reveal some lapse at a later stage, but the Court must consider the internal

checks and balances put in place by the examination authorities before interfering with the efforts put in by the candidates who have successfully

participated in the examination and the examination authorities. The present appeals are a classic example of the consequence of such interference

where there is no finality to the result of the examinations even after a lapse of eight years. Apart from the examination authorities even the

candidates are left wondering about the certainty or otherwise of the result of the examination â€" whether they have passed or not; whether their

result will be approved or disapproved by the Court; whether they will get admission in a college or University or not; and whether they will get

recruited or not. This unsatisfactory situation does not work to anybody’s advantage and such a state of uncertainty results in confusion being

worse confounded. The overall and larger impact of all this is that public interest suffers.â€​

Learned counsel for the MPPSC also submitted that a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Gwalior in W.P. No.12321/2018 (Saurabh Verma vs. The

State of M.P. and others) by order dated 4-6-2018, has declined to pass any interim order permitting the students to appear in the Main Examination

after the last date of submission of forms, i.e. 31-5-2018.

Regard being had to the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the Full Bench decision of this Court in Nitin

Pathak (supra) and the fact that the last date of submission of the forms, i.e. 31-5-2018, is already over and the portal of the MPPSC has been closed,

I am of the considered view that no interim order can be passed for permitting the petitioners to appear in the Main Examination.

It is not in dispute that the Main Examination is scheduled to be held during the period â€" 21-7-2018 to 26-7-2018.

In view of the aforesaid, the MPPSC is granted two weeks time to file reply in all writ petitions, so that the matter can be decided before the date of

the Main Examination.

List this matter in the week commencing 25-6-2018 for further hearing. Office is directed to link all connected writ petitions along with the present

bunch of writ petitions for analogous hearing.