news details |
|
|
| HC dismisses petition challenging KAS with costs 50,000 | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Apr 4: Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur of Jammu & Kashmir High Court dismissed two petitions challenging KAS with costs Rs 50,000. The petitioners responded to notification 2-PSC of 2021 dated 26-02-2021, whereby the Public Service Commission invited applications from eligible candidates for the J&K Combined Competitive Preliminary Examinations 2021.
The scheme of examination comprised of the following that Combined Competitive (Preliminary) examination for the selection of candidates for main examination; Combined Competitive main examination written & interview and personality test. The preliminary examination consisted of two papers i.e. GS-I & GS-II. Paper GS-II was in the nature of a qualifying examination, inasmuch as, the candidate had to secure a minimum of 33% marks in the said paper.
In regard to the GS-I, the Public Service Commission was given the discretion to fix the minimum qualifying marks as it deemed appropriate.
Justice Thakur after hearing both the sides observed that it was, therefore, urged that having failed to file a representation against any of the questions/answers and the keys in terms of Rule 12A & 12B, the petitioners are now stopped in law to throw a challenge to the process of selection being conducted by the Public Service Commission. With a view to verify whether the petitioners had in fact filed the representations with the Public Service Commission, as was reflected in the writ petitions, in regard to the questions highlighted in the writ petitions, record was called. From the record, it does transpire that the petitioners infact had not filed any representation, as had been alleged by them. It also could be seen from the record that the so called representations of the petitioners were infact filed by some other candidates. On the fact of it, therefore, the assertion of the petitioners that they had filed representations is, therefore, totally false and incorrect.
The High Court observed that the petitioners having failed to avail the remedy of filing a representation must be deemed to have accepted and acquiesced in the action of the Public Service Commission in either deleting the requisite number of questions or correcting the answer keys to that extent and waived their right to throw a challenge to the process of selection and the procedure adopted by the PSC. Even otherwise, it appears that the objections raised by the candidates other than the petitioners in regard to the six questions highlighted in Table-C had already been considered by the subject experts and found to be unsustainable.
Justice Thakur observed that in the present case, in view of the fact that the subject experts have already opined on the 06 questions, which had been highlighted in Table-C and rejected the objections so raised (by the candidates other than the petitioners) and in view of the fact that the petitioners had not raised even a murmur and failed to file any representation in regard to the aforementioned 06 questions, I do not deem it necessary to even venture to determined as to whether the questions so highlighted on the face of it were either vague or the answers/options to those questions were incorrect.
Justice Thakur observed that the petitioners had clearly made a wrong statement in the writ petitions regarding the filing of the representations in terms of Rule 12B with the Public Service Commission, which upon verification has been found to be totally false and incorrect. The representations relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners clearly appear to have been filed by the candidates other than the petitioners.
Justice Thakur while dismissing the petition observed that the petitioners had not come to this Court with clean hands but considering the fact that the petitioners are unemployed and some of them belong to far-flung areas with humble backgrounds and considering the fact that their future may be adversely affected, I propose not to take any serious action against the petitioners except impose cost of Rs.50,000/- to be paid by the petitioners collectively, out of which Rs. 25,000 shall be deposited in the Advocates' Welfare Fund and the rest of Rs. 25,000 to be deposited into the account of the Public Service Commission within two weeks from the date of passing of this order. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
