Back
2019 Supreme(Gau) 612
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
N. Kotiswar Singh, J.
Izaz Yusuf Ahmed - Appellants
Vs.
State of Assam and Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) Nos. 2187 and 2188 of 2019
Decided On : 06-05-2019
For the Appellant :K.N. Choudhury, R.N. Sensua and S. Borthakur, Advocates
For the Respondents:C. Baruali, R.K. Talukdar, Advocates and S.S. Roy, GA
Headnote:
Issue on evaluation of answer sheets –learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the aforesaid mistake was purely inadvertent and was not deliberate and no fraudulent act is involved on the part of the petitioners – It was merely a plain omission on the part of the candidates to indicate the "Series" in the OMR sheet – Learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners had themselves given the answers to the questions and as such, the mistake which has occurred has nothing to do with the merit and knowledge of the examinee petitioners and is merely a procedural mistake which has no relevant or relation to the answers given by the petitioners –Held, Learned Standing Counsel, APSC submits that there is no rule that the answer sheets have to be evaluated only by the computer and all other mode or procedure of evaluation is prohibited –In any event, such a stand would have been highly unreasonable, for if the artificial intelligence does not work, human intervention has to be always available as a last resort In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the present petition should be allowed –It is accordingly, directed that the Respondent APSC shall either tick the C Series in the OMR sheets of the petitioners so that the computer can accept the OMR sheets for evaluation or, in the alternative, the answers given by the petitioners in the OMR sheets shall be evaluated manually by Examiners/Evaluators according to the answers given by the candidates –The Original OMR sheets of the petitioners are returned herewith to the learned Standing Counsel, APSC for doing the needful as directed above –Petition allowed
ORDER :
N. Kotiswar Singh, J.
1. Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. R. Sensua, learned counsel and Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. C. Baruah, learned Standing Counsel, APSC assisted by Mr. R.K. Talukder, learned counsel and Mr. S.S. Roy, learned Govt. Advocate for the State.
2. As the issues raised in these 2 (two) petitions are common and relate to same recruitment process, these two petitions are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.
3. The common grievance in these two petitions relate to what the Court sometimes considers an "inadvertent mistake". If that is so, any inadvertent mistake would be condonable.
Therefore, it may be ascertained whether this mistake was inadvertent or not and whether it can be condoned.
4. Apparently, these petitioners had appeared in the preliminary examination in terms of the advertisement issued by the Assam Public Service Commission (APSC) on 17.5.2018 for recruitment to various posts under the State as mentioned in the advertisement.
5. The aforesaid recruitment process consists of a preliminary examination and main examination. These petitions relate to the preliminary examination.
As per the examination scheme, the candidates are required to answer the objective type of questions in the preliminary examination in a specific format given by the authorities and to be answered only by way of highlighting or thickening the circles representing alternate answers given to the questions in the said format generally known as "Optical Mark Recognition (OMR)" format.
6. The aforesaid format has been used to facilitate evaluation of answers in a speedy manner which is to be done with the aid of computers.
In other words, the computers will recognise those highlighted answers proffered by the candidates on the basis of which the computer would instantly reflect the marks depending on the answers otherwise marks given. However, the computer would recognise the OMR sheet if the concerned "Series" mentioned in the OMR sheet is also ticked by the candidate concerned.
7. In the present petitions, the 2 (two) petitioners while giving answers in respect of General Studies subject in the Preliminary Examination did not tick the particular "Series" which the petitioners had been assigned in advance. Both the petitioners had been allotted Series 'C'. While giving answers to the aforesaid OMR sheets, the petitioners were to indicate the series so that when the OMR sheet is fed to the computer, the computer would automatically recognise that it belongs to 'C category of candidates and accordingly, evaluate and reflect the marks of the candidates.
8. Since, the petitioners did not mark the particular series which they were assigned i.e. series 'C as mentioned in the OMR sheet, when their OMR sheets were fed to the computer for evaluation, the computers did not recognise the said OMR sheets. As a result, though the petitioners had given their respective answers to the questions in the OMR sheets in the General Studies paper, the computer did not accept the OMR sheets. The authorities accordingly, awarded 0' mark in respect of the General Studies paper of the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners did not mention "Series C" in the General Studies paper.
It may be mentioned here that in respect of the optional paper, the petitioners duly were awarded 154 and 160 marks respectively. Thus, if the answers in the General Studies are evaluated, they claim that they would be eligible to appear in the Mains Examination.
9. Being aggrieved, the present petitioners have approached this Court for direction to the Assam Public Service Commission (APSC) authorities to evaluate their answers in the General Studies paper so that they could, if successful can appear in the Mains Examination.
10. These petitions have been contested by the Assam Public Service Commission (APSC) primarily on 2 (two) grounds.
11. It has been contended by the learned Standing
