The court emphasized the need for a fair evaluation process and directed BPSC to re-evaluate the answer sheets based on the recommendations of the second expert committee.

A series of writ applications came to be filed before the High Court by all such candidates whose names did not figure in the result of the PT Examination declared by the Bihar Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission or BPSC) for what is known as 52nd to 55th batch; Many intervention applications have also been filed with prayers therein that they too be impleaded as petitioners to the writ applications since they have common cause and relief. All have a common grievance against the declaration of the said result in the background that the examination conducted by the Commission has not been fair in the sense that many a questions which were set for the PT Examination had either wrong answers or were wrong questions, at times verging on absurdity or even a right question had a wrong answer provided in the master answer sheet.

2. There is unanimity amongst the petitioners that any declaration of result based on such question bank set by socalled panel of experts cannot form the basis for testing the knowledge of the candidates in a fair and square manner, even if it is for the preliminary examination. For after all qualifying in the preliminary examination is going to form the basis for enabling a candidate to sit for the mains examination. Their entire career is therefore jeopardised because of the socalled act of the BPSC which has been labeled as callous in approach in conducting such an important examination.

3. From the pleadings it is evident that a lot of hue and cry was raised, which compelled the respondent BPSC to examine the questions as well as the model answers and even BPSC agreed that 8 of the questions out of 150 questions were required to be deleted for reevaluation purposes and they were willing to declare the result on the basis of 142 questions only. This, however, does not satisfy the petitioners and they insist on either cancellation of the preliminary examination or reducing the entry level cutoff marks by as many questions/marks which were found to be erroneous.

4. Several instances have been cited in the affidavits filed by the various petitioners with model answers provided by the BPSC to strengthen their cases for serious re-look at the declared preliminary examination results. The Court examined those questions closely and there was near unanimity that the questions which had been set up by the so-called experts and model answers given to those set of questions by the question setters did require a re-look. It was in this background that vide order dated 9.9.2011 a direction was issued upon the Commission to take help of another set of experts, examine all the questions and model answers afresh, taking into consideration the objections raised by the candidates either through the present writ applications or even objections filed directly with the Commission.

5. Counsel for the Commission did agree to accept the direction of this Court and revert on the issue within the given time frame prayed on their behalf. The matter was finally placed by way of an affidavit filed on behalf of the Commission where they 'did agree that some of the earlier questions were wrong questions or the answer given to the right question was a wrong answer and they are willing to abide by any direction which may come from the Court on the given set of facts. They, however, do take a stand that cancellation of the preliminary examination and re-conducting the same may not be a practical and prudent exercise because holding such an examination of such magnitude is not an easy exercise. Further it is going to delay the recruitment process, which has already been delayed for three batches as the present examination is being conducted for the 52nd to 55th batch.

6. After the affidavit on behalf of the Commission was filed, divergent kind of statements emerged on behalf of the petitioners. Though by and large the majority are not in favour of cancellation of the examination as a whole now but they insis