JUDGMENT :

Sanjib Banerjee,

1. A Candidate, who has failed to clear the qualifying hurdle, questions the correctness of some of the answers in Paper-I of the Preliminary examinations.

2. The Petitioner seeks direct entry into the cadre of District Judge (Entry level). He obtained 33 marks out of 100 in Paper-I based on objective-type questions. The qualifying mark was 35. Each question carried one mark and every wrong answer resulted in 0.25 marks being deducted by way of negative marking.

3. The Petitioner claims that he ought to have obtained at least 37 marks, since the answers to four of the questions were wrong and if the negative marking is discounted, he may have got another half mark.

4. According to the Petitioner, the answers to Questions 20, 52, 72 & 98 were clearly erroneous. He wants such errors to be corrected and the marks in respect of such questions awarded to him as his answer in each case was the more appropriate. The Petitioner asserts that he does not want any ranking, but merely an opportunity to qualify to take part in the competitive leg of the examinations.

5. Question 20 of the paper pertained to marshalling by the subsequent purchaser as provided for in Section