Telangana High Court
WP/23792/2010 of P.Ravi Kumar Vs Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission, on 31 December 2010
MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR Writ Petition No.23792 of 2010 ORDER This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the first respondent in not valuing the answer sheet of the petitioner in respect of paper-I i.e., General
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMEDand THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICEN. RAVI SHANKAR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Writ Petition No.23792 of 2010
This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus todeclare the action of the first respondent in not valuing the answersheet of the petitioner in respect of paper-I i.e., General Essay inthe main examination conducted for Group-I posts in pursuance ofthe Notification, dated 27.12.2007 and the Order, dated 05.02.2010, passed by the Andhra Pradesh AdministrativeTribunal in O.A.No.10193 of 2009, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. In pursuance of the Notification, dated 27.12.2007, forrecruitment in Group-I services, the petitioner submitted anapplication and he succeeded in screening test. Thereafter, heappeared for main examination, which consists of six papers,conducted in the month of August, 2008. In first paper examinationi..e, General Essay, which was conducted on 08.08.2008, thepetitioner marked his Hall ticket number on OMR Sheet with ballpoint pen instead of pencil due to inadvertence. After completion ofexamination, he noticed the said fact and immediately heapproached the Invigilator for correction of Hall ticket number withpencil, but the Invigilator did not permit him. Though he made arepresentation to the first respondent on the same day, no actionhas been taken therein. Thereafter, he made a representation tothe first respondent on the same day. The petitioner states that inthe month of May, 2009, the results were published and afternoticing the marks memo, the first paper i.e., General Essay wasnot valued by the first respondent. He got total 265 marks in other subjects. The grievance of the petitioner is that the though hemade representation on 08.08.2008, the first respondent withoutconsidering the same, has not valued the first paper, which isillegal and arbitrary. Hence, he filed the present writ petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learnedStanding Counsel for the first respondent.
4. Since the representation dated 08.08.2008 of the petitioneris said to be pending consideration before the first respondent,without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I deem itappropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to thefirst respondent to consider the representation, dated 08.08.2008,of the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders thereon inaccordance with law, With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Nocosts.
_____________________
GHULAM MOHAMMED, J
Date: 31.12.2010.Note:Issue CC today.(Bo)sj ___________________
N. RAVI SHANKAR, J