O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the respondent Board pertaining to the list of qualified candidates published on 28.11.2019 and quash the same insofar as it excludes the petitioner and consequently, direct the respondent to call the petitioner for certificate verification process by considering the petitioner's representation dated 09.12.2019 addressed to the Respondent Board in accordance with law and as per the prescribed procedure on the basis of the Notification No.09/2019 dated

01.03.2019 within a time frame.

2. The case of the petitioner is as follows:-

2.1. In response to the notification dated 01.03.2019 issued by the respondent Board inviting applications through online mode for the post of "Computer Instructors", Grade - I (Post Graduate Cadre) in School Education Department for the year 2018-2019, the petitioner applied for the same.

2.2. After receipt of hall ticket, the petitioner participated in the examination conducted on 23.06.2019. The examination was scheduled to be conducted from 10.00 a.m. to 01.00 p.m. The petitioner was allotted Hall 'A' in the examination centre. Since the computer systems in Hall 'A' were not in a proper condition, the petitioner and other candidates were allotted Hall 'C', where also the computer systems were not functioning, because of which, the examination, which was scheduled to be commenced only at 10.00 a.m. commenced only at 11.05 a.m. and ended at 12.05 a.m. Thus, the first limb of grievance of the petitioner is that the computer systems were not functioning satisfactorily.

2.3. The second limb of grievance of the petitioner is as under:-

a) For question Nos.16 & 130, options were displayed wrong.

b) For question Nos.127 & 46, the key answers wrong were given.

c) Question No.89 itself is wrong.

2.4. The grievance of the petitioner is that because of technical snag in the computer system and also wrong options and wrong question, he could secure only 49.87% instead of 50% which is the minimum eligibility mark.

2.5. Hence, setting out his grievances, the petitioner addressed a representation dated 09.12.2019 to the respondent which has not been considered.

2.6. Meanwhile, the respondent Board published a list of shortlisted candidates for certificate verification and the name of the petitioner did not find place in the said list. Hence, challenging the said list, insofar as, it pertains to his exclusion and for a direction to the respondent to call him for certificate verification process, by considering his representation dated 09.12.2019, this writ petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that due to the technical snag in the computer system and also wrong options and wrong question, the petitioner could secure only 49.87% instead of 50% which is the minimum eligibility mark.

4. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent has filed a counter affidavit, from which the relevant portion is extracted hereunder:-

"5. It is submitted that the Board published the tentative answer key on 29.07.2019 and advised the candidates to submit the representations regarding objections, if any, to the tentative key answers with relevant proof of authority from 30.07.2019 to

03.08.2019.

8. It is submitted that a committee of Subject Experts with academic excellence examined the representations received from the candidates, discussed the objections on the basis of authoritative texts and framed final key answers. After thorough scrutiny, final and revised key answers were prepared by the Subject Experts and the answers of all the candidates were evaluated on the basis of the final and revised key answers."

5. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that opportunity was given to the petitioner to file his objections for the tentative key answers with relevant proof of authority from 30.07.2019 to 03.08.2019 and the representation was given only on 09.12.2019 belatedly after four months and hence, the same was not