Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 10506
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Bhargav D. Karia, L. S. Pirzada, JJ
Jaymin Mukeshbhai Patel – Appellant
Versus
Shashi Ranjan Kumar – Respondent
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONTEMPT) NO. 2626 of 2025 | R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12450 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Krisha M Bhimani
For the Respondents: Bhagyodaya Mishra
The court addresses the alleged non-compliance of an interim order directing a public commission to allow a candidate to appear for a competitive examination based on a prima facie error in evaluation.
Headnote:The applicant filed a contempt application alleging non-compliance with an interim order dated 15.10.2025. The previous order had directed the respondent commission to permit the petitioner to appear in the Indian Forest Service (Main) Examination / Civil Services (Mains) Examination 2025, noting a prima facie error in the evaluation of a specific question that led to the petitioner's exclusion. The applicant contends that despite the court's directions, no response has been received from the commission, and the applicant has not been allowed to fill the examination form, nor assigned a roll number or center, while other candidates have received admit cards. The court has issued notice to the respondents returnable on 14.11.2025 and permitted direct service via e-mail.
Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!)
How to permit the petitioner to appear in the Indian Forest Service (Main) Examination/Civil Services (Mains) Examination while keeping the result in a sealed cover?
What is the interim relief granted by the High Court in relation to the UPSC examination for the petitioner?
What is the status of the petitioner's eligibility and procedural steps to be completed by the UPSC as ordered by the Court?
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. interim relief granted to allow a candidate to sit for an exam due to suspected evaluation error. (Para 1) |
| 2. allegation of non-compliance with court directions regarding examination formalities. (Para 2) |
| 3. issuance of notice for contempt proceedings and directions for expedited service. (Para 3 , 4) |
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA)
1. This Court (Coram: Honourable Mr.Justice Nikhil S. Kariel) issued the following directions vide order dated 15.10.2025:
“6.3. To this Court, it would appear that since the above situation is of the creation of the UPSC and whereas, since the prima facie opinion of this Court as regards the answer to question no.25 having been erroneously given by the UPSC could not be dislodged by learned advocate for the respondent and since it also prima facie appears that since the wrong evaluation of one question has resulted in the petitioner being excluded from the Mains Examination for UPSC, 2024, at this stage, as a via media, the following directions are being passed:-
(i) Issue Notice to the respondents, returnable on the 15.12.2025. Learned Advocate Mr.Shukla waives service of notice on behalf of respondents no.1.1 and 1.2. Learned Advocate Mr.Bhagyoday Mishra waives service of notice on behalf of respondent no.2.
(ii) By way of interim relief, respondent no.2 is directed to permit the petitioner to appear in the examination for Indian Forest Service (Main) Examination / Civil Services (Mains) Examination pursuant to Examination Notice No.06/2025-IFOS dated 22.01.2025.
(iii) It is further clarified that while the petitioner is permitted to appear in the examination, the result of the petitioner shall be kept in a sealed cover, which would be opened only after the directions of this Court and whereas, it is further clarified that permission to appear in the examination shall not be treated as any equity being created in favour of the petitioner.
(iv) The UPSC shall take appropriate steps to ensure that whatever procedural formalities have to be completed by the petitioner are done as soon as possible and whereas, the UPSC shall ensure that the petitioner is permitted to sit in the examination for the IFoS post in the 2025 examination.
Direct service of this order is permitted.”
2. Learned advocate Ms. Krisha M. Bhimani for the applicant invited the attention of this Court to the following averments made in paragraph 8 of the petition, which read as under:
“8.Despite all such communications, the Applicant has received no response whatsoever from the Respondent Commission. The Applicant has not been allowed to fill up the form for the Examination so far. The Applicant states that all other candidates have been issued the admit card for the examination, however, the Applicant has neither been assigned the roll number nor has been allotted the centre for the Examination which is scheduled from 16th November, 2025.”
3. In view of the above, issue Notice returnable on 14.11.2025. Direct service through e-mail is permitted today.
4. Learned advocate Ms. Krisha M. Bhimani to serve an advance copy to learned advocate Mr. Bhagyodaya Mishra and learned advocate Mr. Harsheel D. Shukla, who had appeared before the learned Single Judge for the respondents. To be listed on top of the Board.
