Anil And Another v. Union Of India & ORS

that it is the function of the examining body comprised of experienced and expert teachers in the subjects, to formulate the policy as to how the evaluation of the performance as of the examinees is to be

made and the procedure in which results are to be prepared and published which seems to be missing in the instant case wherein the discrepancies have been openly admitted in the written statement which are as under:- a). Almost 32+32 text sheet were examined that day by the examiner alone and due to paucity of time, oversight/slight error occurred in evaluation;

b). The error occurred purely because of human error which was intended to complete the assignment within the stipulated time. Further, during the course of arguments in the court, it has also been put forward by the counsel for the petitioner that the Board was constituted only for medical examinations, added with the fact that out of 16 recruitment centres, no such Board for revaluation of skill test had been detailed for the other centres because there was no provision in the advertisement itself for detailing such board for the revaluation of the skill test therefore it would be against the principle of Natural justice that the Board constituted for medical purposes be allowed to conduct revaluation of Steno type tests and put the clock back causing harassment to the petitioners.

Also, a perusal of the advertisement dated 03.03.2017(Annexure R1), para 16(IV)(6) supra makes it clearly evident that right to make any modification compatible with recruitment rules in skill test assessment procedure does not give the right to outrightly change the result and disqualify the earlier qualified candidates in skill type tests.