IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR

RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. _______/2018

Rameshwar Prasad Yogi S/o Kajod Mal Yogi aged about

30 years, Resident of Gram Post Kundal, Tehsil Dausa
(Rajasthan)
MOB. 9983582926

…Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan through Secretary, Department
of Education (Secondary Education), Government
Secretariat, Secretariat , Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. The Director, Secondary Education, Department of
Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its
Secretary , Ghooghara Ghati, Ajmer (Rajasthan)
….Respondents

S.B. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
AND
IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLE 14, 16 & 21 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
AND
IN THE MATTER OF WRONG ANSWER KEY ADOPTED
BY THE RAJASTHAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
WITH REGARD TO SUBJECT SANSKRIT & GENERAL
KNOWLEDGE POST TEACHER GRADE II 2016
RECRUITMENT.
AND
IN THE MATTER OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE
To,
The Hon’ble Chief Justice and his other Hon’ble
Companion Judges of the Rajasthan High Court,
Bench at Jaipur

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS,

The humble petitioner, above named, most

respectfully begs to submit as under:-

1. That the petitioner is a Citizen of India and the

cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of
this Hon’ble High Court, therefore, he is entitled to
invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon’ble
Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
to redress the genuine grievance.

2. That the respondent No. 3 issued an

advertisement for appointment on the post of
Teacher Grade II 2016. Copy of the advertisement is
annexed and marked as Annexure-1.

3. That the petitioner being fully eligible applied and

participated in the selection procedure for the post
of Teacher Grade II subject Sanskrit.

4. That the selection on the post of Teacher Grade II

is based on competitive examination [General
Knowledge + Subject Paper (Sanskrit in case of
petitioner].

5. That the respondents conducted the competitive

examination of G.K. and educational psychology
(Group-I) on 26.04.2017 and subject Paper i.e.
Sanskrit on 30.06.2017. Copy of the admit cards of
 the petitioner are enclosed herewith and marked as
Annexure-2 collectively.

6. That the result of competitive examination came

to be declared on 14.02.2018 in which cut off marks
of OBC (male) category has been fixed as 366.05
with date of birth 08.12.1991. Copy of the result
dated 14.02.2018 is enclosed herewith and marked
as Annexure-3.

7. That after result declared on 14.02.2018,

petitioner’s marks was shown on 23.08.2018
wherein he secured 365.48. Copy of the mark sheet
of the petitioner is enclosed herewith and marked as
Annexure-4.

8. That the result declared on 14.02.2018 is a faulty

result, which contains wrong answer and correct
answers attempted by the petitioner has been
considered as incorrect by the respondents.

9. That if the mistake is rectified than the petitioner

will get total 14 marks. Copy of the answer key of
paper of Sanskrit dated 14.02.2018 is annexed
herewith and marked as Annexure-5.

10. That the question no. 6 of Sanskrit subject is

quoted as under :
iz- 6 ^viq=%* v= lekl &
¼1½ u¥~rRiq:"k%
¼2½ cgqozhfg%
¼3½ vO;;hHkko%
¼4½ deZ/kkj;%
The above question (question no. 6) is deleted by
RPSC (Hereinafter referred as respondent no. 3) but
as per the authentic books taught in various
universities correct option for answer is 2.

That the question no. 8 of Sanskrit subject is

quoted as under :
iz- 8 ^v/;srk* bfr r`PizR;;kUrins /krwilxkSa Lr
%
¼1½ vf/k $ b.k~
¼2½ vf/k $ bM~-
¼3½ vf/k $ by~
¼4½ vf/k $ ,M~-
The above question (question no. 8) is deleted by
respondent no. 3 but as per the authentic books
taught in various universities correct option for
answer is 2.

That the petitioner submitted representation of

question no. 43 of Sanskrit subject is quoted as
under :
iz-la- 43 ^gu~* /kkrks% yM~-ydkj
e/;eiq:"k ,dopus :ia L;kr~ &
¼1½ vgr~
¼2½ vg%
¼3½ vgu~
¼4½ vàu~
The respondent no. 3 has chosen option
2 as a correct answer but as per the authentic
books taught in various universities correct answer
is option no. 2 & 3 collectively. Petitioner also
submitted his objection for above question (question
no. 43). Copy of the objection dated 02.09.2017
submitted by the petitioner is annexed and marked
as Annexure-6.
 That the question no. 104 of Sanskrit subject is
quoted as under :
iz- 104 fu"Øe.klaLdkjL; dky%
¼1½ prqFkZs ekls
¼2½ f}rh;s ekls
¼3½ "k"Bs ekls
¼4½ v"Ves ekls
The above question (question no. 104) is
deleted by respondent no. 3 but as per the
authentic books taught in various universities
correct option for answer is 1.
Copy of the relevant part of question paper of
Sanskrit is annexed and marked as Annexure-7.
Copy of the relevant part of the authentic books of
sanskrit are annexed and marked as Annexure-8
collectively

11. That the question no. 23 of G.K. subject is quoted

as under :

Maharana Pratap made Chavand his capital. It

remained the capital of Mewar till

(1)1597 (2) 1605

(3)1609 (4) 1615

That the respondent no. 3 has chosen

option No. 4 as correct answer for question No.
23 where as per the authentic books taught in
various Universities all the answers are wrong,
hence answer is not falls under any of the
options.

That the question . 37 of G.K. subject is quoted as

under :
 Which of the Following texts on music were written
by Rana Kumbha ?
A. Sangeetraj
B. Sangeet Mimamsa
C. Sudhprabandh
D. Kalanidi
In the above question (question no. 37)
respondent no. 3 has chosen option No. 1 as
correct answer, whereas as per the authentic
books taught in various Universities correct
option for answer is 3.

That the question no. 98 of G.K. subject is quoted

as under :

Which of the following river is known as “The Ganga

of the South”?
(1½ Krishna (2) Godavari
(3)Mahanadi (4) Periyar
Respondent no. 3 has deleted the
above question (question no. 98) whereas as per
the authentic books taught in various
Universities correct answer is option no. 2. Copy
of the relevant part of question paper of G.K. is
annexed and marked as Annexure-9.Copy of the
relevant part of the authentic books of G.K. are
annexed and marked as Annexure-10
collectively. Copy of the answer key of G.K. dated
08.02.2018 is annexed and marked as
Annexure-11.

12. That if the answer of question no. 23,37,98 of

G.K. are corrected than the petitioner will get 7.98
marks (2 for correct answer and 0.66 which is
deducted due to negative marking) and similarly if
 the answer of question no. 6,8,43,104 of Sanskrit
are corrected than the petitioner will get 8.66
marks. Hence total marks of petitioner will be
254.55.

13. That thus in the view of above if after correction

in answer key if the marks of both subjects are
added then petitioner will get 382.12 which is much
more than the cut off marks of OBC (Male) category
i.e. 366.05. But due to adopting incorrect answer
the present petitioner has been ousted from the
selection zone having at no fault.

14. That in this era of competition in which even 0.01

marks is important but the respondent No. 3
arbitrarily, while adopting the incorrect answers has
curtailed the right of petitioner. That it was the duty
of the respondent No. 3 to take necessary and
cautious steps to ensure that correct and authentic
answer have been adopted and no selection can be
made on the basis of faulty answer key but the
respondent No. 3 has failed to do so due to which
petitioner is facing a great hardship despite of
preparing a lot for recruitment.

15. That it was a primary duty of the respondents to

constitute an expert committee for examining the
authenticity of the answer key but the respondents
have failed to take necessary steps due to which
petitioner is facing a great hardship.

16. That before declaration of result respondents

sought objections on the answer keys dated
14.02.2018 and 08.02.2018. Petitioner submitted
objections on the question no. 43 of Sanskrit but
 no heed has been paid to the objection submitted by
petitioner and answers remained unchanged in the
answer key.

17. That being aggrieved to action of the respondents

this writ petition is filed on following amongst
grounds:
GROUNDS

a) Because the action of the respondents in not

giving the benefit as received by the similarly
situated candidates is highly arbitrary,
unreasonable, illegal and same is required to be
quashed and set aside.

b) Because the result of written examination

came to be declared on 14.02.2018 in which cut off
marks of OBC (male) category has been fixed as
366.05 with date of birth 08.12.1991.

c) Because in the result declared on 14.02.2018

and petitioner’s marks was shown on 23.02.2018
wherein petitioner secured 365.48 marks.

d) Because the result declared on 14.02.2018 is a

faulty result which contains wrong answers and
correct answers attempted by the petitioner have
been considered as incorrect.

e) Because after correction in answer key for

question no. 23,37,98 & 6,8,43,104 total marks of
petitioner will be 382.12 which is much more than
the cut off marks of OBC (Male )category.

f) Because in this era of competition in which

0.01 marks is important but the respondent No. 3
 arbitrarily, while adopting the incorrect answers
have curtailed the right of petitioner.

g) Because it was the duty of the respondent No.

3 to take necessary and cautious steps to ensure
that correct and authentic answer have been
adopted but the respondent No. 3 has failed to do so
due to which petitioner is facing a great hardship
despite of preparing a lot for recruitment.

PRAYER

It is, therefore humbly prayed that Your Lordship

may graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ
petition and by an appropriate writ, order or direction:-

1. That the result declared on 14.02.2018 (Anx-3) be

quashed and set aside to the extent it contains
(incorrect answer) for question No. 23, 37, 98 of
General Knowledge and question No. 6, 8, 43, 104
of Sanskrit and further the respondents may kindly
be directed to correct the answers of question No.
23, 37, 98 & 6, 8, 43, 104 of General Knowledge
and Sanskrit and award appropriate marks and give
appointment to the petitioner if he stands in merit
in the interest of justice.

2. That the faulty answer key of the result declared on

14.02.2018 be quashed and set aside to the extent
of answers of question No. 23, 37, 98 of General
Knowledge and question No. 6, 8, 43, 104 of
Sanskrit and further the respondents be directed to
amend / correct the answer key.
3. Cost of the writ petition may also be awarded in
favour of the petitioner.

HUMBLE PETITIONER

THROUGH COUNSEL

(TANVEER AHAMAD)
Advocate

NOTES :-

1. This is S.B. Civil Writ Petition as no vires of any Act

is under challenge.
2. That no such similar writ petition prior to this has
been filed by the petitioner before any competent
court of law.
3. That PF, Notices and extra sets shall be filed as per
direction of the Hon’ble Court.
4. That Pie papers were not readily available; as such
the writ petition has been typed on stout papers by
my private steno.

COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. _______/2018

Rameshwar Prasad Yogi Versus State of Raj. & anr.

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF WRIT PETITION

I, Rameshwar Prasad Yogi S/o Kajod Mal Yogi aged

about 30 years, Resident of Gram Post Kundal, Tehsil
Dausa(Rajasthan) do hereby take oath and state as
under:-
1. That I am the Petitioner in the above mentioned case
therefore, I am well conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the case.
2. That the annexed writ petition has been drafted by my
counsel under my instructions. I have gone from
Para No.1 to 24 and grounds (a) to (i ) thereof along
with prayer clause of the same and I have read over
the same and understood the same.
3. That the statements in the writ petition are true and
correct.

VERIFICATION

I, the above named deponent, do hereby verify that

the contents of paras 1 to 3 of my above affidavit are true
and correct. Nothing material has been concealed
therein and no part of it is false. So help me God.
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. CIVIL MISC. STAY APPLICATION NO……../2018

IN
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. _______/2018

Rameshwar Prasad Yogi S/o Kajod Mal Yogi aged about

30 years, Resident of Gram Post Kundal, Tehsil
Dausa(Rajasthan)
…Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan through Secretary, Department
of Education (Secondary Education), Government
Secretariat, Secretariat , Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. The Director, Secondary Education, Department of
Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. Rajasthan Public Service Commission through its
Secretary , Ghooghara Ghati, Ajmer (Rajasthan)
….Respondents

S.B. CIVIL MISC. STAY APPLICATION UNDER

ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA

To
The Hon’ble Chief Justice and his other Hon’ble
Companion Judges of the Rajasthan High Court,
Bench at Jaipur

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS,

The humble petitioner-applicant above named, most

respectfully begs to submit as under:-
 1. That the petitioner has preferred annexed writ
petition numbered above, contents of the writ
petition may kindly be treated as part and parcel of
this stay application also for the sake of bulkiness
and brevity.

2. That humble petitioner has a strong prima-facie

case in his favour, balance of convenience also lies
in her favour and if petitioner is not granted interim
protection, he will face irreparable loss and injury,
which cannot be compensated in terms of money.

3. That principle of natural justice and equity also

demands that the interim order be passed in favour
of the petitioner.

PRAYER

It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this stay

application may kindly be allowed and during the
pendency of the writ petition, the respondents may be
restrained from giving appointment to the candidates
selected on the basis of faulty answer key/result dated
14.02.2018in the interest of justice.
Any other appropriate order, which may be found
just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the
case, be passed in favour of the petitioner.

HUMBLE PETITIONER-APPLICANT

THROUGH COUNSEL
Jaipur
Dated : ________/2018
(TANVEER AHAMAD)
Advocate
NOTES :-
1. That no such application has been filed previously
before this Hon'ble Court.
2. PF, Notices and extra sets shall be filed as per
direction of the Hon’ble Court.
3. Pie papers were not readily available; as such the
stay application has been typed on stout papers by
my private steno.

(TANVEER AHAMAD)
Advocate
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. CIVIL MISC. STAY APPLICATION NO……../2018

IN
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. _______/2018

Rameshwar Prasad Yogi Versus State of Raj. & anr.

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF STAY APPLICATION

I, Rameshwar Prasad Yogi S/o Kajod Mal Yogi aged

about 30 years, Resident of Gram Post Kundal, Tehsil
Dausa(Rajasthan), do hereby take oath and state as
under:-
1. That I am the Petitioner-Applicant in the above
mentioned case therefore, I am well conversant with
the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. That the annexed application has been drafted by
my counsel under my instructions. I have gone from
Para No. 1 to Para No. 3 of the same and I have read
over the same and understood the same.
3. That the statements in the application are true and
correct.

VERIFICATION
I, the above named deponent, do hereby verify that
the contents of paras 1 to 3 of my above affidavit are true
and correct. Nothing material has been concealed
therein and no part of it is false. So help me God.
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. _______/2018

Rameshwar Prasad Yogi Versus State of Raj. & anr.

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF DOCUMENTS

I, Rameshwar Prasad Yogi S/o Kajod Mal Yogi aged

about 30 years, Resident of Gram Post Kundal, Tehsil
Dausa(Rajasthan) do hereby take oath and state as
under:-
1. That I am the petitioner, I am fully conversant
with the facts and circumstances of the present
case.

2. That the Annexure-1 to Annexure-12 annexed

with this writ petition are the true and correct
photostat copies of their originals.

VERIFICATION
I, the above named deponent, do hereby verify that
the contents of paras 1 and 2 of my above affidavit are
true and correct. Nothing material has been concealed
therein and no part of it is false. So help me God.
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. _______/2018

Rameshwar Prasad Yogi Versus State of Raj. & anr.

INDEX

Sl. Page
Particulars
No. No.
1. Writ Petition 1-10
2. Affidavit in support of Writ Petition 11
3. Stay Application 12-14
4. Affidavit in support of Application 15
5. Documents:
Annexure-1- Copy of the advertisement. 16-20
Annexure-2- Copy of the admit cards of 21
the petitioner.
Annexure-3- Copy of the result of the 22-34
petitioner dated 14.02.2018.
Annexure-4- Copy of the marks of petitioner 35
dated 23.02.2018
Annexure-5- Copy of the answer key for 36
Sanskrit dated 14.02.2018.
Annexure-6- Copy of the objection 37
submitted by the petitioner.
Annexure-7- Copy of the relevant part of 38-52
question paper of Sanskrit.
Annexure-8- Copy of the relevant parts of 53-60
authentic books of Sanskrit.
Annexure-9- Copy of the relevant part of 61-83
question paper of G.K.
Annexure-10- Copy of the relevant parts of 84-94
authentic books of G.K.
Annexure-11- Copy of the answer key of 95
paper of General Knowledge
dated 08.02.2018.

6. Affidavit in support of documents 96

(TANVEER AHAMAD)
Advocate
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. _______/2018

Rameshwar Prasad Yogi Versus State of Raj. & anr.

SYNOPSIS

1 That the result of competitive examination came to

be declared on 14.02.2018 in which cut off marks of
OBC (male) category has been fixed as 366.05 with
date of birth 08.12.1991.

2 That subsequently after declaration of result

petitioner’s marks was shown on 23.02.2018
wherein petitioner secured 365.48.

3 That the result declared on 14.02.2018 is a faulty

result which contents wrong answer and correct
answers attempted by the petitioner has been
considered as incorrect.

4 That after correction in answer key for question no.

23,37,98 of G.K. subject and question no.
6,8,43,104 total marks of petitioner will be 382.12
which is much more than the cut off marks of OBC
(Male) category.

5 That in the era of competition in which 0.01 marks

is important but the respondent No. 3 arbitrarily
while adopting the incorrect answers have curtailed
the right of petitioner.

6 That it was the duty of the respondent No. 3 to take

necessary and cautious steps to ensure that correct
and authentic answer have been adopted but the
 respondent No. 3 has failed to do so due to which
petitioner is facing a great hardship despite of
preparing a lot for recruitment.

(TANVEER AHAMAD)
Advocate

Jaipur
Dated : ________/2018
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR

REGD. ADDRESS :

S.B.C.W. PETITION NO.………………………./2018

Rameshwar Prasad Yogi Versus State of Raj. & anr.

THAT in the above case registered address of the

petitioner is

Rameshwar Prasad Yogi S/o Kajod Mal Yogi aged about

30 years, Resident of Gram Post Kundal, Tehsil
Dausa(Rajasthan)