Point of Law: Telangana State Public Service Commission - Power of Judicial review - Scope and Interference - Scope of interference of court in evaluation of answer scripts where candidates have committed errors of wrong bubbling/double bubbling, absence of bubbling of the hall ticket numbers etc., in OMR answer sheets is no longer an issue which is res integra.

JUDGMENT :

Hima Kohli, J.

1. The present batch of writ petitions have been placed before this Bench on the directions of the learned Single Judge with a request to reconcile the divergence of opinion expressed by two sets of Division Benches of the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh High Court, in two writ petitions, namely W.P.No.20088 of 2003 and W.P.No.28874 of 2015.

2. The dichotomy in the views expressed by the two Division Benches is founded on the scope of interference by courts exercising powers of judicial review in matters relating to incorrect/erroneous bubbling, double bubbling, absence of bubbling of the personal particulars of a candidate, appearing in written examinations conducted by the Telangana State Public Service Commission, including hall ticket number, booklet serial number, paper code and examination centre number etc. The backdrop in which the matter has been placed before this bench has been delineated in the order dated 19.07.2018, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.22540 of 2018 and the connected batch of matters, in the following words:-

“In this batch of writ petitions, grievance is against not evaluating OMR answer sheets of petitioners in the examination conducted by the Telangana State Public Service Commission (TSPSC) pursuant to notifications issued to conduct recruitment to various categories of posts, i.e., Forest Beat Officers, Veterinary Assistants, Staff Nurse, Trained Graduate Teachers (Art), Physical Education Teachers and Secondary Grade Teachers.

The petitioners applied to the posts to which they are eligible and they appeared in the examinations conducted by TSPSC. On the OMR sheet, candidates are required to furnish personal details, such as Hall Ticket Number, Question Paper Series Number, Venue code, Text Booklet Series and to darken the bubbles under the relevant boxes containing respective numerical numbers.

Petitioners contend that their OMR answer sheets are not evaluated on the ground that against required columns of personal particulars, the petitioners have made wrong bubbling/ made double bubbling/ have kept the bubbles empty.

The petitioners claim that though there is wrong bubbling or double bubbling or no bubbling of entries in their personal particulars, the same ought to have been ignored and the answer scripts should have been evaluated. If they are found eligible, they should be subjected to further selection process.

The issue is whether the wrong bubbling, double bubbling, or no bubbling of the personal particulars, such as hall-ticket number, booklet serious number, paper code and examination centre number, would be fatal to disentitle evaluation of the answer scripts of the candidates or the same can be ignored and the answer scripts should be evaluated.

The issue of effect of wrong bubbling in the OMR sheet regarding personal particulars, such as Hall Ticket Number, Centre Code, Paper Code, Booklet Series has come up for consideration before this Court in several cases.

In W.P.No.20088 of 2003 filed against the decision of the Tribunal rejecting the claim of the petitioners therein to evaluate their answers ignoring wrong bubbling, the Division Bench of this Court took the view that since the petitioners themselves committed mistake in encoding their register numbers/optional codes, they have to suffer for the same and nobody could be blamed for their mistakes and confirmed the decision of Tribunal.

Similar issue has come up for consideration before another Division Bench in W.P.No.28874 of 2015 arising out of the order in O.A.No.892 of 2015 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad, whereunder the Tribunal directed the Staff Selection Commission to evaluate papers and declare the result of the applicant therein ignoring wrong bubbling. The Division Bench noted that only on account of mistakes committed in the personal particulars, non-evaluation of answer scripts would be violating the constitutional right to seek public employment, would