AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The Law Expert has submitted a detailed report to the Court on the reevaluation. As far as the answer to Question No.1 in Group-D is concerned, the result of the reevaluation of the Expert is as under:
“Result of Reevaluation-The candidate has only written that Section 18 prescribes a bar and has given a citation which is a wrong one. Hence, for writing that anticipatory bail provision is not applicable he has to get 0.5 mark and another 0.5 mark for writing Section 18 of SC ST P.A. Act. Hence, in my opinion he is entitled to 1 mark for his answer to the above question.”
As far as Question No.3 in Group-D is concerned, the result of the reevaluation is as under:
“Result of Reevaluation-The candidate while answering the above question has only written that the trial of offences under Prevention of Corruption Act has to be dealt by following warrant procedure trial. The answer is very short and cryptic for which he has been rightly awarded with 0.5 mark.”
The net result is that the candidate gets just 0.5 mark additional for the answer to Question No.1 in Group-D. In all, therefore, the Petitioner secures 45.5 + 0.5 i.e. 46 marks. Since he does not secure 47% in paper III, there is no scope for calling him for interview.
A copy of the reevaluation report be furnished to learned counsel for the Petitioner.
In that view of the matter, no further directions can be issued in the matter. The writ petition is dismissed.
The Answer Script to be put back in a sealed cover and kept with the Registrar (Examinations) along with the reevaluation report.
……………………..