Back
2021 Supreme(Guj) 469
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
BHARGAV D. KARIA, J.
BHAVIN JITENDRABHAI CHOLERA - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & others - Respondent
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 19125 of 2017
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CLARIFICATION OF ORDER) NO. 1 of 2017
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 19125 of 2017
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FIXING DATE OF EARLY HEARING) NO. 1 of 2018
Decided On : 29-06-2021
For the Appellant : MR DIGANT B KAKKAD
For the Respondent: MR KANVA ANTANI, AGP, MR PREMAL R JOSHI
Point of Law: Court should not reevaluate or scrutinize the answersheet and anysuch matters which are in the realm of expertize by the educationists
Headnote:
Constitution of India - Article 226 - Grant grace marks for the 12 questions against which wrong answers have been mentioned in the 1 question papers and to further grant 2 marks more in question No. 14(B) - Gujarat Public Service Commission to recalculate the marks and thereafter place the petitioner at the appropriate number in the select list subject to fulfillment of other eligibility criteria
Finding of the Court:
All the 3 questions needed a long process of reasoning and the High Court itself has noticed that the stand of the Commission is also supported by certain text books. When there are conflicting views, then the court must bow down to the opinion of the experts. Judges are not and cannot be experts in all fields and, therefore, they must exercise great restraint and should not overstep their jurisdiction to upset the opinion of the experts
Result: Civil Applications dismissed
ORDER :
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Digant Kakkad for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Kanva Antani for respondent No.1-State and learned advocate Mr. Premal Joshi for respondent No.2 through video conference.
2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
“A. Your Lordships be pleased to issue writ of mandamus, directing Gujarat Public Service Commission to take into consideration the objections as raised by the petitioner and thereafter grant grace marks for the 12 questions against which wrong answers have been mentioned in the 1 question papers and to further grant 2 marks more in question No. 14(B);
B. Your Lordships be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus commanding Gujarat Public Service Commission to recalculate the marks and thereafter place the petitioner at the appropriate number in the select list subject to fulfillment of other eligibility criteria;
C. Your Lordships be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus commanding Gujarat Public Service Commission to place on record the correct answers to the 12 questions for which objections had been raised by the petitioner;
D. Your Lordships be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus commanding Gujarat Public Service Commission to declare the correct answer for the 3 questions for which the answers had been changed subsequently when the final answer key came to be published.
E. Pending admission and final hearing of the present petition, Your Lordships be pleased to direct Gujarat Public Service Commission to place on record answers to the 12 questions with supporting documents for which objections had been raised;
F. Pending admission and final hearing of the present petitioner Your Lordships be pleased to direct Gujarat Public Service Commission to consider the candidature of the petitioner by taking into consideration that petitioner had been allotted grace marks for the 12 questions and plus 2 marks more for question no. 14(B).
G. Your Lordships, be pleased to grant any other relief which deems proper in the interest of justice.”
3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has filled online application form pursuant to the advertisement issued by the Gujarat Public Service Commission [for short ‘GPSC’] for the post of Gujarat Administrative Service, Class-I and Gujarat Civil Service, Class-I and Class-II. The petitioner appeared in the examination conducted on 12.10.2014 and results of preliminary examination was published on 19.03.2016 wherein, the petitioner was declared successful. The petitioner also thereafter, applied for main written examination on 27.05.2016. Pursuant to the declaration of the result of the main examination on 10.04.2017, the petitioner was called for an interview on 17.05.2017. On 28.07.2017, GPSC declared the list of successful and unsuccessful candidates wherein, the name of the petitioner appeared in the list of unsuccessful candidates. The petitioner has therefore, filed this petition with the aforesaid prayers:
4. This Court [Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.G.Shah]passed the following order dated 12.10.2017:
“NOTICE, returnable on 22.12.2017. Learned AGP waives service of notice for the respondent State.
One post is to be kept vacant in each cadre except for the post of Dy.S.P.
To be tagged with Special Civil Application No.16761 of 2017. Direct service is permitted upon rest of the respondent/s.”
5. On inquiry being made with the advocate of the petitioner Shri Kakkad it was pointed out that Special Civil Application No. 16761 of 2017 was dismissed by order dated 19.06.2018 by this Court [Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.V.Anjaria] wherein similar prayers were made by unsuccessful candidates. However, learned advocate Mr. Kakkad submitted that so far as the petitioner is concerned, the case of the petitioner stands on slightly different footings as the petitioner is agitating for grant of 2 marks in question No. 14B of paper of Gujarati because according to the
