The court affirmed that review petitions require strong justifications such as new evidence or errors apparent on the record; mere dissatisfaction with prior judgments is insufficient.

JUDGMENT :

1. The instant civil review has been filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Section 114 of C.P.C. for review of the order/judgment dated 17.10.2023 passed in L.P.A. No. 297 of 2018 and analogous cases.

2. The ground for review is that the cases pertaining to consideration of their case by not allotting the marks with respect to four questions which are out of syllabus and in consequence thereof, they have been disqualified in the matter of recruitment for promotion through limited competitive examination to the post of Sub- Inspector.

3. This Court, before proceeding to examine the argument advanced on behalf of the parties, deems it fit and proper to refer the factual background, as under, by making it in two parts, first part pertains to the pleading/case of the review petitioner nos. 1 to 4 and second part pertains to the pleading/case of the review petitioner nos. 5 to 15.

Factual aspects of the case of the review petitioner nos. 1 to 4:

4. The review petitioners No.1 to 4 had preferred the letters patent appeal being LPA No.297 of 2018, LPA No.474 of 2018, LPA No.476 of 2018 and LPA No.580 of 2018 against the orders of the writ court by which the writ petitions have been dismissed refusing to grant any relief in favour of the petitioners seeking a direction upon the respondents to struck down the questions which were out of syllabus and asked without correct option for the examination held for appointment to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police pursuant to advertisement No.09/2017 in the name of Jharkhand Police Sub Inspector Limited Competitive Examination, 2017.

5. The review petitioners/appellants who were in service posted as Constable in different districts of the State of Jharkhand have made applications for consideration of their candidature for being appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police in pursuance of the advertisement being Advertisement No.09/2017 issued by Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, hereinafter referred to as JSSC, for selection and appointment of the candidates through the limited competitive examination.

6. As per the case of the petitioners/appellants the total number of vacancies was shown to be 1544 out of which 772 vacancies were for unreserved category but while publishing the result, only 663 candidates have been shown to be qualified in the written test. The case of the petitioners/appellants are that they are having required eligibility criteria, as such, they made applications for consideration of their candidature by participating in the process of selection. The petitioners/appellants, having been declared to be unsuccessful candidates in the written test, sought for information from the concerned authority/examining body.

7. According to the petitioners/appellants, the main reason for being unsuccessful in the written test is that the answers of some of the questions have wrongly been printed, therefore, they ought to have been allotted marks of such questions. It is the grievance of the petitioners/appellants that they have made due objection regarding the wrong printed options, however, to no effect, therefore, the writ petitions have been filed on the ground that the answers of some of the questions have wrongly been printed, which according to the petitioners/appellants, are correct but the same has been found to be incorrect by the evaluator and in that view of the matter, the opinion has to be sought for from the expert in order to reach to the rightful conclusion about the correctness of the answers of such questions but no endeavour has been taken by the examining body.

8. On the basis o