OA No. 627/2011. Case: Rajiv Ranjan Kumar Vs Union of India. Central Administrative Tribunal
| Case Number | OA No. 627/2011 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: S.K. Bariar, Advocate and For Respondents: S.K. Tiwari, Advocate, ASC |
| Judges | A.E. Ahmad, Member (Ad.) and S.K. Pattnaik, Member (J) |
| Issue | Service Law |
| Judgement Date | August 06, 2014 |
| Court | Central Administrative Tribunal |
Order:
S.K. Pattnaik, Member (J)
-
The applicant has prayed for re-evaluation of answer scripts of objective question no. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 10 of Postman Book of Postman/Mail Guard Examination 2009-2010 held on 21.11.2010 and for a direction to the respondents to declare him qualified in surplus list of Postman/Mail Guard 2009-2010 for North Region.
-
Applicant's case runs in a very short compass:
The applicant while working as GDSBPM/MC, Panjiarwa in account with Ragunathpur SO appeared in the departmental promotion examination for the post of Postman/Mail Guard Examination, 2009-2010 held on 21.11.2010 for North Bihar Region. The said examination comprised three papers. The paper of 'Postman Book' was objective type carrying 50 marks and there were as many as 10 questions, each having 5 marks. There were 18 posts for general candidates, 14 posts for Scheduled Caste candidates and 6 posts for Scheduled Tribe candidates. The applicant had applied under general category. The result was published on 27.11.2010 where name of the applicant did not find place. Surplus result of 17 candidates was published on 29.11.2010 where also the name of the applicant did not figure. The applicant obtained information under Right to Information Act and found that he has been awarded 36 marks in the paper 'Postman Book'. Though the questions were of objective type and the applicant had answered 9 questions correctly but instead of awarding 5 marks for each question, the examiner had awarded him only 4 marks against each question thereby the total aggregate became 36 marks whereas, had he been awarded 5 marks each for all the 9 correct answers, he would have been got 45 marks and in that even his total marks would have been 98 marks instead of 89 marks awarded out of total marks of 150. The claim of the applicant is that arbitrarily, he has been awarded 4 marks against each correct answer of 'Postman book' and if the matter would be re-evaluated by an expert, he would secure more marks which will upgrade his status in the surplus list and he would be coming under Sl. No. 13 but as per present tabulation, he did not find his place out of 17 persons listed under the surplus list.
-
Respondents contested the case by filing a written statement.. According to the respondents, there was correct evaluation of answer scripts and the action of the respondent authorities was neither illegal nor arbitrary and the applicant is not entitled to any relief as he...
To continue reading
Request your trial