Debiprasad Kar Vs State of Odisha

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Senior counsel appearing for the OPSC. Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.

¶16

The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer:

¶17

“The Petitioner thus prays that the Hon'ble Court be pleased to admit this petition and after hearing the opposite parties direct the OPSC, Cuttack include the name of the petitioner in the short list prepared as one of the selected candidates taking in to account his correct answers with that of wrong key answers,

¶18

And/or to pass any other order/orders which may deem fit and proper.”

¶19

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that pursuant to an advertisement dated 31.12.2021, the Petitioner submitted his candidature along with other eligible candidates. The last date for

¶20

// 2 //

¶21

submission of online application was 25.02.2022. Thereafter, the Written Examination was held after the same was postponed and the Written Examination conducted by the OPSC through offline mode on 27.08.2022. The Petitioner participated in such written examination. On 07.11.2022 the result of such written examination was published by the OPSC and a provisional merit list was prepared on the basis of the mark secured by the candidates in such written examination. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that it was only on 09.01.2024 the OPSC published the answer key in its official website after downloading the said answer key the Petitioner verified the same and consulted various subject experts and ultimately it was found that some of the key answers are wrong. He further contended that although the Petitioner has given the correct answers, however on the basis of answer key he has not awarded the marks.

¶22

Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the Petitioner thereafter approached in person the OPSC and tried to ventilate his grievance, however he has not been given opportunity. Being aggrieved by the conduct of the OPSC, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition.

¶23

Mr.P.K.Mohanty, learned Senior counsel for the OPSC on the other hand contended that the examination was conducted as per the Rules and the terms of the advertisement. He further contended that the questions were set by subject experts by the OPSC. It was also contended that after a detailed discussion with the experts and after preparing a list of the candidates who have been evaluated on the basis of such key answers. Therefore, the Opposite Parties have not committed any illegalities in the matter. He further submitted in the event the Petitioner has any grievance the Petitioner shall approach

¶24

// 3 //

¶25

the OPSC taking therein all the grounds along with the documents in support of his contention and such grievance shall be considered by the OPSC within a stipulated period of time in accordance with law.

¶26

Considering such submissions of the learned counsels for the respective parties, on careful examination of the materials on record as well as keeping in view the limited nature of grievance, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition at the stage of admission by granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the OPSCOpposite Party No.2 within a period of 10 days by filing a detailed representation taking therein all the grounds along with the documents in support of his contention. In such eventuality, the Opposite Party No.2 shall consider the same in accordance with law and the Rules, if required the Opposite Party No.2 shall also constitute an expert body for examination of the grievance raised by some of the candidates with regard to answer key prepared by the subject expert engaged by the OPSC. The aforesaid exercise be carried out within two months from the date of communication of a certified copy of this order.

¶27

With the aforesaid observation/direction the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶28

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

¶29

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge

¶30

Anil

¶31

Signature Not Verified

¶32

Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 11-Mar-2024 10:33:18

Debiprasad Kar v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Debiprasad Kar v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kisu Jena Vs State of Odisha

Pintu Majhi Vs State of Odisha

Ghana Shyama Jena Vs Chairman, Odisha Rural Housing and Development Corporation Ltd., Khurda

Manoj Kumar Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Som Mohapatra Vs State of Odisha

Dhaneswar Rout Vs State of Odisha