CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has rejected a writ plea to quash the final key answers published by the TN Public Service Commission on its website on April 4, 2019, and the list of provisionally selected candidates for writing the main examination in respect of posts included in the Combined Civil Services-I Examination (Group-I Services) 2016-19, and consequently direct it to revise the said answer keys and the list of selected candidates.
Justice V Parthiban, who dismissed the petition from S Vignesh of West Mambalam, observed that admittedly, the Commission itself had identified the defects in the key answers and questions and embarked upon to salvage the situation by constituting an expert panel, which after analysis, had recommended for evaluation of those defective questions and answer keys and thereafter, the marks were added, in pursuance of such recommendation. Therefore, the mistakes which were pointed out by the candidates, were accepted and steps were taken immediately to rectify the same and in that process, this court finds no injustice has been done to any of the candidates.
“Hence, this court is of the view that in the overall consideration of the merits of the case on hand, this court need not be concerned with a minor infraction in the details submitted by the Commission, since it would not in any way tilt the balance of the case in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the petitioner cannot have a legitimate cause for complaining in regard to the present selection. In the said circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner has not made out a case for intervention of this Court,” the judge said and dismissed the petition.
Rejecting another prayer, the judge pointed out that the petitioner himself has not secured enough marks in his category to reach the admission zone for the main examination. Therefore, at his instance, this court cannot make any further probe into various other allegations raised on his behalf.
Before parting with the case, the judge observed that the TNPSC, a premier recruiting agency for State public service, entrusted with the task of mass recruitment in various services, cannot assume its role lightly and allow mistakes of the present nature to creep in the selection process, quite often. The credibility of the Commission would be at stake before the public at large if the mistakes are often repeated. In public interest, the Commission must ensure that in future selection, such mistakes do not occur. Not that every candidate, who participated in such selection, can afford to approach this Court for legal redress. Therefore, ultimately, the responsibility lies with the Commission to ensure free and fair selection process, the judge added.