The Allahabad High Court, in a significant decision, directed the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission (UPPSC) to appoint Janhvi, a candidate from the Scheduled Caste female category, as a Civil Judge (Junior Division) in the 2018 judicial services. The case, titled Janhvi vs. State of U.P. & Others (Writ-A No. 3887 of 2021), resolved a five-year battle over an error in the calculation of examination marks that initially denied her appointment.
The Case Background
Janhvi contested the results of the UP Judicial Services Examination, 2018, claiming she was unfairly denied two marks in her English Language paper. These marks were critical, as her total score of 473 was just two marks short of the category cut-off of 475. Upon inspection of her answer script, Janhvi discovered the error and filed a writ petition in 2021, seeking rectification and consideration for the position.
The bench comprising Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Donadi Ramesh deliberated on the procedural delays, as the petition remained pending for over three years. Advocates Siddharth Khare and Sanjay Kumar Singh represented the petitioner, while Senior Advocate G.K. Singh and Additional Chief Standing Counsel Kritika Singh appeared for the UPPSC.
Legal Issues Addressed
1. Mark Calculation Error: The petitioner argued that an error in totaling marks in her English precis writing paper led to her disqualification. The examiner initially awarded her 22 marks for the precis and 1 mark for the title, totaling 23 marks. However, the final tally incorrectly reduced it to 21 marks.
2. Accountability of UPPSC: The case underscored the role of public institutions in maintaining fairness and transparency in competitive examinations.
3. Equity and Timely Justice: The court weighed the petitioner’s rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, emphasizing the necessity of ensuring equal opportunity.
Key Observations by the Court
The High Court observed, “The petitioner, through no fault of her own, was denied the opportunity she rightfully earned. The UPPSC’s reliance on erroneous marks deprived her of her rightful place in the judicial services.” The bench further criticized the examiner’s justification for the error, deeming it “wholly untenable reasoning.”
Addressing procedural delays, the court stated, “A citizen cannot be presumed to suspect unfair play in public examinations. The petitioner acted diligently upon discovering the error.”
Court’s Decision
The court directed the UPPSC to:
– Grant Janhvi her appointment as a Civil Judge (Junior Division) against an available vacancy or create a supernumerary post if necessary.
– Place her seniority in the 2018 batch of appointees based on her revised score, while excluding arrears of salary due to the delay.
