Mohit Kumar Shah, J.—The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 07.02.2024 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna (hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned C.A.T.) in O.A. No. 050/00332/2016 whereby and whereunder the original application filed by the petitioner herein has been dismissed being devoid of merit.

2. The short facts of the case according to the petitioner are that he is employed as Sr. S.O. (A) at East Central Railway, Hajipur. The office of the Financial Advisor and the Chief Accounts Officer (hereinafter referred to as the “FA & CAO”), Hajipur had issued a notification dated 22.05.2014 regarding holding of Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (hereinafter referred to as the “L.D.C.E.”) for forming a panel of Assistant Financial Advisor (Group-B) from amongst the Group-C eligible staff of Accounts Department against 30% vacancy of the year 2010-12. The petitioner had offered his candidature to appear in the L.D.C.E. which was allowed and then he had appeared in the examination held on 23rd and 24th of August, 2014, whereafter the result was declared on 09.10.2014 but the name of the petitioner was not shown in the list of successful candidates. The petitioner was communicated vide letter dated 28.11.2014 that he had obtained 81.13 marks in the first paper and 96 marks in the second paper. The petitioner had then self-evaluated his own answer book as per the model answers of Paper-1 and he found that there were glaring mistakes in evaluation of the answer sheet of Paper-1, leading to the petitioner having failed in the L.D.C.E. Thereafter, the petitioner had submitted an application on 27.02.2015 before the FA & CAO, E.C.R., Hajipur explaining therein about the glaring mistakes which have occurred in evaluation of his answer book of Paper-1 and had requested for re- evaluation of the same. The petitioner had also submitted an application on 15.04.2015 before the General Manager, E.C.R., Hajipur regarding the glaring mistakes in evaluation of his answer book of Paper-1 and had requested for re-evaluation of the same. However, since no heed was paid to the representations filed by the petitioner, he had filed the connected original application, inter alia praying therein for directing the respondent authorities to take a decision upon the applications filed by him as also redress his grievance regarding re-evaluation of answer book of Paper-1 of L.D.C.E. and then declare his result afresh on the basis of enhanced marks as also issue consequential order of promotion as Assistant Financial Advisor (Group-B) in Pay Band-2 against 30% quota with all consequential benefits.

3. The respondents had filed written statement before the learned C.A.T., wherein it was stated that though the petitioner had filed an application for re-evaluation of his answer book for Paper- 1, however he has been informed that re-evaluation of answer sheets is not permissible in the light of the judgments rendered by the learned C.A.T., Chandigarh and other Hon’ble Courts as also there is no provision regarding re-evaluation of answer sheets. It has been further stated that the answer scripts of the petitioner were examined by the evaluating officials with due care and diligence and since answers were required to be written in subjective manner, the evaluator being an officer of the rank of SAG, had applied his wisdom and judgment and had accordingly allotted marks against the respective answers. It has also been stated that the request of the petitioner for re-evaluation of answer sheets was turned down by the respondent authorities in light of various judgments rendered by the learned Courts, especially the one dated 25.05.2010, passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 907 of 2006 (Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission vs. Mukesh Thakur and Another).

4. The learned C.A.T. by the impugned order dated 07.02.2024, considering the fact that there is no provis