/* remove this */ Blogger Widgets /* remove this */

Sunday, June 26, 2016

UPTET 2015 / 16 Exam SARKARI NAUKRI News - Candidates / Abhyartheeyon ne TET-15 Exam ki OMR Sheet Bhrne mein Galtee kee aur OMR invalid ho gayee, Lekin baad mein OMR Sheet sahee karne va Dobara Janche jane ka anurodh kiya, Jisko Chief Justice kee Bench ne Candidates kee Galtee Mankar Yachika Kharij kar Dee -

UPTET 2015 / 16 Exam SARKARI NAUKRI   News - Candidates / Abhyartheeyon ne TET-15 Exam ki OMR Sheet Bhrne mein Galtee kee aur OMR invalid ho gayee, Lekin baad mein OMR Sheet sahee karne va Dobara Janche jane ka anurodh kiya, Jisko Chief Justice kee Bench ne Candidates kee Galtee Mankar Yachika Kharij kar Dee 


Court No. - 21 

Special Appeal No. - 379 of 2016 
Kadambinee And 60 Ors. 
State Of U.P. And Another 

Counsel for Appellant :- Siddharth Khare,Ashok Khare 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. 

Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,Acting Chief Justice 
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Srivastava,J. 
(Oral: Hon'ble V.K. Shukla, ACJ) 
Kadambinee and 60 others are before this Court, assailing the validity of the order dated 26.04.2016 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.18690/2016 (Kadambinee and others vs. State of U.P. and others), wherein the Writ Petition has been dismissed. 
Petitioners-appellants, who are 61 in number, are seeking a direction to the respondents to rectify the mistake committed by the petitioners-appellants in the OMR sheet either in filling the booklet or the language opted for a certain subject or with regard to filling of the series or with regard to the filling up particulars in part iv. The selection was for Teachers Eligibility Test 2015 and it is not disputed that the OMR sheet is required to be filled up by the candidate. The petitioners-appellants either failed to fill up the series or the particulars of part iv or the language option and on this ground their result have been declared as 'invalid'
The Learned Single Judge considered the request of petitioners-appellants and has turned down the same vide judgement and order dated 26.04.2016 and thus impelling the petitioners-appellants to be before this Court. 
Learned Counsel for the appellants has submitted before this Court that the case in hand is one of humane error and Teacher's Eligibility Test is merely a qualifying examination and accordingly, liberal view ought to have been taken in the matter instead of taking such a drastic view. 
Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, has contended that the issue in question has already been answered by two Division Benches of this court and as such, no interference be made as OMR sheet was required to be filled up by candidate correctly and only when OMR sheet is filled up correctly, then the same be checked by the computer and once there being no provision for manual checking, then no relief should be accorded. 
After respective arguments have been advanced, the factual situation that is so emerging, in the present case, is that important instructions have been issued at the very first page of the question booklet series. The said instructions are as follows:
PRI-2015 Q.B. NO.3012852 
jksy ua0 

ROLL NO. (अंकों में/In figures) 
jksy ua0
ROLL NO. Question Booklet Series 

समय : 2:30 घंटे पूर्णांक : 150 
Time : 2:30 hours Max. Marks :150 
tc rd u dgk tk, bl iz'u iqfLrdk dks u [kksysaA 
Do not open the booklet until you are told to do so. 
iz'u ds mRrj ds fy, dsoy dkys@uhys ckWy IokbaV isu dk bLrseky djsaA 
To mark answer use black/blue ball point pen only. 
vH;FkhZ mRrj&i=d ij mRrj nsus ls igys lHkh vuqns'kksa dks lko/kkuh iwoZd i<+ ysaA 
Candidate must read all the instructions before writing the answers. 
vkidks vius lHkh mRrj dsoy OMR mRRkj&i=d ij gh nsus gSaA ijh{kk mijkar mRrj&i=d buohftysVj dks ykSVk nsaA 
You have to mark your answer on OMR Answer Sheet only. After the examination is over, handover the Answer Sheet to the Invigilator. 
EkgRoiw.kZ vuqns'k 
1- lHkh iz'uksa ds mRRkj nhft,A lHkh iz'uksa ds vad leku gSaA 
2- OMR mRRkj i=d ij fn;s x;s LFkku ij vH;kFkhZ viuk laoxZ (category), jksy uacj] iz'u&iqfLrdk la[;k] iz'u&iqfLrdk lhjht vafdr djsaA 
Hkk"kk &2 ds vUrxZr vaxzsth] mnwZ ;k laLd`r esa ls tks Hkk"kk fodYi ds :i esa vkius jftLVsª'ku esa nh gks] dk gh p;u djsa rFkk OMR mRrj & i=d ij vafdr djsa vU;Fkk mRRkj&i=d dk ewY;kadu ugh fd;k tk;sxk ftldh ftEesnkjh Loa; vH;kFkhZ dh gksxhA 
3- bl iz'u iqfLrdk esa 150 iz'u gSaA izR;sd iz'u ds pkj oSdfYid mRrj fn;s x;s gSaA vH;kFkhZ lgh mRRkj fufnZ"V djrs gq, tSlk fd uhps fn[kk;k x;k gSA 
mnkgj.k% ○ ○ ● ○ tcfd ¼3½ lgh mRrj gSA muesa ls dsoy ,d xksys vFkok ccy dks mRRrj&i=d ij dkys@uhys IokbaV isu ls iwjk xgjk dj nsaA ,d ls vf/kd mRrj nsus dh n'kk esa iz'u ds mRrj dks xyr ekuk tk;sxk ,oa mls tkWpk ugha tk;sxkA 
4- iz'u iqfLrdk esa dqy ikWp Hkkx gSaA izR;sd iz'u 1 vad dk gSA Hkkx&kkk esa ls Hkk"kk &2 ds varxZr fdlh ,d Hkk"kk dk p;u dj mlds leLr iz'uksa dks djsaA leLr iz'u cgqfodYih; gSaA udkjkRed ewY;kadu ugha gksxkA 
5- iz'u&iqfLrdk ds doj ist ij ,oa vUnj dqN Hkh u fy[ksaA 
6- iz'u&iqfLrdk [kksyus ds rqjUr ckn tkWp djds ns[k ysa fd iz'u&iqfLrdk ds lHkh ist Hkyh&HkkWfr Nis gq, gSA ;fn iz'u iqfLrdk esa dksbZ deh gks rks bufoftysVj dks fn[kkdj mlh lhjht o dksM dh nwljh iqfLrdk izkIr dj ysaA 
7- OMR 'khV esa fu/kkZfjr LFkku ij gy fd;s iz'uksa dh la[;k 'kCnksa rFkk vadksa esa vo'; mfYyf[kr djsaA 
1. Answer all questions. All questions carry equal marks. 
2.The candidate should indicate his category, Roll No, Question Booklet Sr. No., Question Booklet Series at the space provided on OMR Answer Sheet. 
For Language-2 from English, Urdu or Sanskrit, choose only one language which you have selected as an option in your registration and mark on the OMR Answer Sheet otherwise the Answer Sheet will not be evaluated and the candidate will be solely responsible for it. 
3. This Question Booklet contains 150 questions. Each question has four alternative answers. The candidate has to darken only one circle/bubble on the answer sheet using black/blue ball point pen indicating the correct answer as shown below: 
Example: ○ ○ ● ○ where (3) is the correct answer. 
If more than one answers are marked, it would be treated as wrong answer and it will not be examined. 
4. Question Booklet contains Five Parts. Each question carries 1 mark. Attempt all the questions selecting any one language from Language-2 in Part-III. All questions are multiple choice types. There will be no negative marking. 
5. Do not write anything on the cover page and inside the question booklet. 
6. If you happen to find that the booklet issued to you does not have all the pages properly printed or it has any other deficiency, then you need to approach the invigilator to get another booklet of same series and code. 
7. The number of questions attempted must be written in words and figures in the specified place on the OMR sheet. 

Bare perusal of the important instructions would go to show that the candidate should indicate his category, Roll No., Question Booklet Sr. No., Question Booklet Series at the space provided on OMR Answer Sheet and mention has also been made that for language-2 from English, Urdu or Sanskrit, the candidate have to choose only one language which he has selected as an option in your registration and same be marked on the OMR Answer Sheet otherwise the Answer Sheet will not be evaluated and candidate will be solely responsible for it. The instructions are clear and categorical that each and every place provided for filling up OMR sheet would be filled up carefully and in case of any discrepancy in following the instructions, candidate's OMR Answer Sheet will be rendered invalid and will not be evaluated. 
Petitioners-appellants, in pith and substance, are requesting to waive of such condition in question that was provided for in the important instructions and proceed to evaluate the OMR Answer Sheet manually by permitting them to rectify the respective mistakes that have occurred in the OMR sheet. 
Petitioners-appellants may be right that it may be a humane error but the fact of the matter is that as per the important instructions so supplied, there is a directive wherein consequences has been provided that answer-sheet will not at all be evaluated and the candidate will be solely responsible for the same. 
A Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal Defective No.123 of 2014, Smt. Arti Verma Vs. State of U.P. And Others held as under: 
"Each candidate necessarily must bear the consequences of his failure to fill up the application form correctly. No fault can, therefore, be found in rejecting the application for correction when the candidate himself has failed to make a proper disclosure or where, as in the present case, the application is submitted under a wrong category. Interference of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution is clearly not warranted in such matters as it creates grave uncertainty since the selection process cannot be finally completed. Moreover, in the present case, the appointment was of a contractual nature for a period of eleven months. Hence, considering the matter from any perspective, the learned Single Judge was not in error in dismissing the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. 
The Special Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed" 
Another Division Bench, also of this Court in Special Appeal No.834 of 2013, Ram Mahohar Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and Others has held as under: 
"If prospective teacher can not even correctly fill up the simple on line application form for his employment, it is obvious what he is going to teach if appointed. There are certain decisions cited on this issue. But none of them deal with this aspect whether under the discretionary jurisdiction of the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India such incompetent persons should be allowed to play with the future of the next generation." 
In reference of evaluation of OMR answer sheet pertaining to Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission, Writ Petition No.66487 of 2015 (Santosh Kumar Pandey vs. State of U.P. and others) has been filed wherein this Court after considering the cases of humane error, has proceeded to follow the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Karnataka Public Service Commission vs. B.M. Vijaya Shankar (1992) 2 SCC 206 and categorical view has been taken that a candidate should abide by such instructions and the object of instructions is to minimise any possibility of chance of any abuse and larger public interest demands insistence of observance of instructions rather than its breach. 
The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Santosh Kumar Pandey (supra), of which one of us (V.K. Shukla, J.) was a member, has clearly taken the view that instructions in question have to be interpreted in the context of object for which it has been framed and in the said case, mention has been made that in this era of computerization, once petitioners has proceeded not to comply with the instructions and has committed error not at one place but at two places in the OMR sheet and same mistake has been repeated in attendance sheet, the candidate has to blame himself and further in case any direction is given to Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission undertake such an exercise as has been prayed by the petitioner, then it would not only open flood gate, but same would make way for humane intervention and give chance of manipulation and manoeuvring in the fool proof scheme prepared by Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission. 
Appellants' counsel has placed reliance on the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Price Waterhouse coopers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Kolkata-I and another 2012 (11) SCC 316, wherein absence of deemed care has been noted and finding has been returned that it does not mean that the assessee is guilty of either furnishing inaccurate particulars or attempting to conceal its income. 
Case in hand is in relation to public examination, wherein the candidate desirous of undertaking examination has been obligated to discharge certain functions and once in the said direction, the instructions in question, retained at the first page of the answer-sheet, has not been complied with in its word and spirit, then under the shelter of due care such permission cannot be accorded as has been prayed for. The said judgement in question itself has proceeded to make a mention that it has to be given in the peculiar facts of this case, that the imposition of penalty on the assessee is not justified. It has further proceeded to mention that the Court was satisfied that the assessee had committed an inadvertent and bona fide error and had not intended to or attempted to either conceal its income or furnish inaccurate particulars. 
The case in hand is concluded by three Division Benches of this Court and there is no reason or occasion to take different or contrary view. 
Special Appeal sans merit and the same is dismissed accordingly. 
Order Date :- 31.05.2016 
A. Pandey 

 UPTET  / टीईटी TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS  
UP-TET 201172825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com
 Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTET Uptet | Uptet news | 72825  Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Latest News | 72825  Teacher Recruitment Uptet Breaking News | 72825  Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Fastest News | Uptet Result 2014 | Only4uptet | 72825  Teacher Recruitment  Uptet News Hindi | 72825  Teacher Recruitment  Uptet Merit cutoff/counseling Rank District-wise Final List / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,

Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility TestWest Bengal TET / WBTETMPTET / Madhya Pradesh TETASSAM TET / ATET
UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TETHPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET