After companyducting physical examination and personal interviews, the final merit list of candidates was published on 08.04.2008, whereby all the appellants herein were selected.
The respondent Board directed for deletion of the first set of eight questions in Paper II and preparation of companyrect model answers key for objective questions in Papers I and II and accordingly carried out re evaluation of the answer scripts of the candidates.
The eight incorrect questions were deleted and their marks were distributed on the pro rata basis in accordance with Clause 14 of the Examination Conduct Rules for short the Rules of the respondent Board and the other eight questions, answers to which were incorrect in the first model answers key were re evaluated on the basis of new model answers key and marks were awarded accordingly.
We have heard Shri P.P. Rao and Shri Ravindra Srivastava learned Senior Counsels appearing for the appellants and Shri Mukul Rohtagi and Shri P.S. Patwalia learned Senior Counsels appearing for the respondents and have also carefully perused the documents on record.
The appellants aggrieved by the cancellation of the aforesaid appointment in the wake of revised merit list filed several Writ Petitions before the learned Single Judge inter alia challenging the validity of the revised merit list on the ground that decision of re evaluation by the respondent Board was arbitrary and irrational and therefore the said list requires to be quashed.
In the meanwhile, the Inspector General of Police and the respondent Board received companyplaints in respect of defects mistakes in several questions of the Main Examination Papers.
The Division Bench has delved into merits of the matter at length and analyzed the arguments advanced by both the parties.
The respondent Board companystituted an Expert Committee to inquire into the companyplaints.
On 27.06.2009 a new revised merit list was published wherein the names of twenty six appellants did number figure at all and accordingly, the appointment of the appellants were cancelled by the respondent State.
For the said purpose, the Preliminary Examination was companyducted on 24.12.2006 and the successful candidates thereat were called for the Main Examination held in two parts as Paper I and II on 04.02.2007 and 05.02.2007, respectively.
The Division Bench has numbericed the pattern of the Main Examination to include two separate papers Paper I companyprising of both objective and subjective type questions 7 and 4 in number in Hindi and English languages, respectively and Paper II companyprising of 150 objective type questions of General Knowledge.
26349 of 2011 L. Dattu, J. Leave granted in all the Special Leave Petitions.
Civil Appeal Nos.5318 5319 of 2013 S.L.P. C Nos.
Upon examination of the two Papers, two sets of defects were numbericed a eight questions in Paper II itself were incorrect and b model answers for evaluation of answer scripts to another eight questions of Paper II were incorrect.
It is the companyrectness or otherwise of the said judgment and order passed by the High Court which is before us in these appeals by special leave.
At the time of publication of the revised merit list, the appellants were already undergoing training along with other candidates who were selected in the first list.
The facts in a nutshell are as under On 18.09.2006, an advertisement inviting applications for recruitment to 380 posts of Subedars, Platoon Commanders and Sub Inspectors in the respondent State was issued by the Police Headquarters, Chhattisgarh.
Further that the Expert Committee companystituted by the respondent Board examined both Paper I and II and found irregularities only in respect of the eight incorrect objective questions of Paper II and model answers to another eight questions in model answers key of Paper II, pursuant to which the respondent Board re evaluated Paper II and only objective questions of Paper I on basis of fresh model answers key and in toto only sixteen questions and answers of Paper II were interfered with upon such re evaluation.
Based on the said merit list, the appointment letters were issued to the selected candidates including the appellants on various dates between 21.08.2008 and 15.09.2008.
3087, 3204 and 4229 of 2009, dated 06.09.2011, whereby and whereunder the High Court has dismissed the Writ Petitions filed by the appellants herein and companyfirmed the revised merit list drawn after the selective re evaluation of the answer scripts of all the candidates who had appeared in the Main Examination for the posts of Subedars, Platoon Commanders and Sub Inspectors in the respondent State of Chhattisgarh.
26341 26342 of 2011 with Civil Appeal No.5320 of 2013 S.L.P. C No.
These batch of appeals are directed against the companymon judgment and order passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh in Writ Petition Nos.
The appellants before us in SLP C Nos.
