Chhattisgarh High Court Rejects Challenge Against Civil Judge (Entry Level) Exam, 2020

The Chhattisgarh High Court on Thursday dismissed a batch of 52 writ petitions challenging the Civil Judge (Entry Level) Examination, 2020 conducted by the State Public Service Commission. A Single Bench of Justice P. Sam Koshy returned a finding that the alleged procedural lapses in conducting the exam could not be said to have had a prejudicial effect on the candidates. The Bench further opined that merely because 9 questions were deleted from the final answer key does not mean that the interest of students is affected. It held that deletion of questions and distribution of marks to all candidates on pro rata basis will not vitiate the examination. Reliance was placed on Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board v. Vikram Singh Rana & Ors., where in a similar set of facts it was held that, "By virtue of the deletion of 18 questions, which were found as not correct or sustainable because of ambiguity or due to availability of more answers or having been framed wrongly without giving proper answer, the marks available in respect of such 18 questions (one mark each) have been re-distributed to the remaining 132 questions (out of total of 150) as per the formula stipulated in this regard. All the candidates, who participated in the Examination, are either 'beneficiary' or 'not a loser' in any manner and hence there cannot be any valid or sustainable grievance or cause of action for the writ petitioners." The said Judgment also made it clear that, "the writ petitioners cannot contend or insist that the question paper should carry a minimum of 150 questions always. No provision of law or precedent is brought to the notice of this Court that, if the multiple choice questions get reduced (from 150 to 132 in the instance case, with equitable distribution of marks to all the candidates in respect of remaining questions), it will vitiate the exercise." Background In the instant case, the Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission published the model answers for the Preliminary Examination in November 2020. Objections were called from all the candidates and the final amended model answers were declared the next month. When the final amended answers were published, the CGPSC deleted 9 questions holding that they were contrary to the available sources and literature, and the answer to one question was amended. This led to filing of instant batch petitions on the ground that CGPSC has wrongly deleted the 9 questions, leading to the Petitioners being put to a substantial loss as the awarding of marks after the deletion of 9 questions does not show the awarding of marks to be from 100 Marks. It was argued that the answers given in the model answers initially published by the CGPSC were, proper, legal and logical and justified and there was no scope of any alteration to the said answers in any manner. The Petitioners are also raised following issue on the procedure of conducting the examination, which allegedly put them to a mental strain in the course of attempting the questions: In the Question Paper that was circulated, the valuation procedure prescribed reflected that there shall be negative marking for each wrong answer, which initially was not reflected in the Advertisement. This made the candidates quite apprehensive in attempting the answers fearing negative marking and it was only after a considerable period of time in the course of examination that the authorities passed on an instruction that there shall be no negative marking;In the Advertisement, it was reflected that 100 Questions will carry a maximum of 100 Marks however, in the examination 200 Marks for 100 Questions were allotted.Though in the Question Paper the time schedule showed the examination to be conducted from 10:00 AM to 1:00 PM but in fact the time granted was only for 2hours that is from 10:00 AM to 12:00PM which again created a lot of confusion in the mind of the participants; The Petitioners argued that the Maxim "Sublato Fundamento Cadit Opus" should be brought into force and it should be held that since the foundation of conducting of the examination itself was erroneous, all subsequent process also has to be deemed to be erroneous and it would stand collapsed and vitiated without any further necessity of judicial scrutiny in respect of subsequent proceedings. Findings At the outset, the Court observed that the procedural lapses indicated by the Petitioners could not have any prejudicial effect on their performance. It noted, "this Court does not find any substantial hamper and prejudice occurring in the course of attending the examination by the candidates on the procedural front. Another reason for the contentions raised by Petitioners deserving rejection is the fact that from a large section of many thousands candidates who had appeared, the grievance has been raised only by these 52 Petitioners and of which also except...

Chhattisgarh High Court Rejects Challenge Against Civil Judge (Entry Level) Exam, 2020

Akshita Saxena

Tags