Vijay Kumar v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.10914 OF 2022 DATE OF DECISION: 20.05.2022 Vijay Kumar

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA Present :

Mr. B. D. Rana, Advocate, For the petitioner.

Mr. Pankaj Middha, Addl. AG, Haryana.

ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL) Grievance of the petitioner herein is qua his alleged wrong assessment of three questions viz questions No.6, 8 and 48. 2.

Adverting to all the three one-by-one in seriatim. As regards question No.6 even if the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is accepted that he had opted 'C' as answer which was wrongly treated as 'B', at the most he would be entitled to additional one mark but still does not make it to the zone of selection by virtue of additional one mark. 3.

Qua question No.8, the argument canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that google suggests that answer is otherwise as against what has been opted by the Commission. I am of the view there is no such law to treat google as the final arbiterin case of any conflict between the answers opted by the expert examiners and the google. 4.

Qua question No.48, learned counsel argues that petitioner had rightly answered and yet it had been marked wrong. SHALINI BHATIA 2022.05.21 13:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.

5.

On a Court query, learned State counsel submits that every candidate has been given one grace mark qua question No.48. I see no reason as to why thepetitioner would have any grievance inasmuch as he has already got grace mark as stated by the learned State counsel. 6.

As regards argument of the petitioner that petitioner is entitled to additional 05 marks under the socio-economic criteria, the same goes against the very declared parameters as per the advertisement, inasmuch as, mother of the petitioner being a government employee, he has been rightly held disentitled for the same. 7.

On any of the counts above, no ground for interference is made out.

8.

Dismissed.

MAY 20, 2022 (ARUN MONGA) Shalini JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No SHALINI BHATIA 2022.05.21 13:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.