(Kurian Joseph and Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, JJ.)
U.P. Jal Nigam & Ors. ___________________________ Petitioner(s)
v.
Ajit Singh Patel & Ors. etc. _______________________ Respondent(s)
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 5410-5419/2018, decided on March 16, 2018
(For Admission and I.R. and IA No. 27341/2018-Exemption From Filing O.T.)
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners, points out that the petitioners having found out that there were defective questions and incorrect answer keys, the High Court should have permitted the petitioners to re-work the merit list. He submitted that the High Court has gone wrong in insisting for an individual notice in the factual matrix of this case. In this regard he has also placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in Vikas Pratap Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh, reported in (2013) 14 SCC 494.
2. Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent(s), however, points out that whether the questions were defective or key answers were incorrect are disputed question and, therefore, liberty should be granted to the respondents to participate in the inquiry. He further submits that the decision of this Court referred to by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners may not apply to the facts of this case.
3. Be that as it may, having gone through the impugned judgment, we do not find that the door is yet closed. It is for the petitioners, if they are so advised, to approach the High Court itself for a liberty to re-work the answer sheets on the basis of the corrections, in case the High Court is also of the view that the corrections need to be made.
4. The special leave petitions are, accordingly, disposed of.
5. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
———
