Point of Law
Onus is on the candidate to not only demonstrate that the key answer is incorrect but also that it is a glaring mistake which is totally apparent and no inferential process or reasoning is required to show that the key answer is wrong.

JUDGMENT :

A.S. SUPEHIA, J.

The present petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking for the following prayers:

“A.*** *** ***

B.YOUR LORDSHIP be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondent no.2 herein to consider the correct answers with regards to question no. 34 and question no. 39 and further direct to come out with the new merit list/waiting list/selection list.

C.YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to further direct the respondents herein to not conduct any further examination till the final disposal of the present petition or in alternative be pleas to direct the respondents to make appointments subject to the outcome of the present petition.”

2. The petitioner along with other persons appeared for written examination for the post of “Electric Assistant” which was conducted by the respondent No.2 on 14.06.2015. In all, 2663 candidates appeared for the said examination and the result was declared on 13.07.2015. It is the case of the petitioner that he has secured 70.15 marks and since there are five(5) questions, of which answers were incorrect, he made a representation on 10.08.2015 to the respondent authority for correcting the same. Thereafter, again vide communication dated 12.02.2016, since the answers were not corrected, he again approached the respondent authority. It is the case of the petitioner that after his representations, out of five(5) questions, three(3) were corrected and remaining two(2) were not corrected by the respondent authority and a selection list was prepared to that effect, in which name of the petitioner did not figure.

3. Learned advocate Mr.Alok Thakkar appearing for the petitioner has invited the attention of this court to the five(5) questions, as referred by the petitioner in his representation. He has submitted that as regards the question Nos. 5 and 15 are concerned, the respondent authorities have rectified the same however, so far as question Nos. 34, 39 and 49 are concerned, since the same are not rectified, the petitioner is entitled to the additional marks. Learned advocate has further pointed out that question No. 34, which refers to “Unit of Capacitor”, he has submitted that the petitioner has answered the above question with option “A” i.e. “Farad”, which is correct and he should have been allotted one mark for the same, however, the same is not conferred to him on the ground that option “D” i.e. “Farad and Micro Farad” is correct, as per the respondent authorities. Further, reliance is placed by the learned advocate on the documents annexed at page No. 32, the source of the same is from internet, which states that the correct answer of question No. 34 would be “Farad” and hence, one mark should be alloted to the petitioner. As regards question No. 39 is concerned, there is no dispute about the correctness of the answer given by the petitioner and, hence, he is given one mark for the same. As regards question No.49, the petitioner has admitted that the same is incorrect hence, he would not get any additional mark for the same. Thus, the only issue, which remains would be of question No. 34, which is answered by the petitioner. He has submitted that as per the source through internet, the answer provided by the petitioner was correct and he should be allotted one mark and if the same is allotted to him, he would be getting the appointment.

4. Per contra, learned advocate Mr.Dipak Dave for the respondent No.2 has submitted that the correct option for the question No. 34 as regards unit of capacitor would be option “D” i.e. “Farad and Micro Farad” and not the option “A” i.e. “Farad”. He has submitted that the aforesaid view has been expressed by the Superintendent Engineer, who has set the papers, who is an expert person and the same has been decided by the competent authority of PGVCL to change/revise the results of the candidates and again, on the basis of the revised answer key, OMR Sheet of al