Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the merit list (Annexure-6) in terms of which candidates’ names have been shortlisted for the physical test for recruitment to the post of Sub-Inspector from the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector and Constable in the limited competitive examination held on 26.11.2017, as several questions in the said examinations were framed erroneously, having wrong options in the multiple choice answer and some of the questions were out of syllabus.

Further prayer has been made for a direction upon the respondents to re-valuate/re-tabulate the answer scripts of the petitioner/ candidates appearing in the said examination, awarding marks for question which were framed erroneously and to re-publish the merit list of the candidates selected for physical test, as enough seats are still lying vacant. It has also been prayed that till then, the selection process of Sub-Inspector through the said examination be kept in abeyance.

3. The facts of the case lies in a narrow compass. The respondent Commission published an advertisement being Advt. No. 9