IN THE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: July 28, 2011 1. LPA No. 619 of 2011 (O&M) Ajay Kumar and another ...Appellants Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents 2. LPA No. 620 of 2011 (O&M) Neelam ...Appellant Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JUSTICE JUSTICE JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate, for the appellant. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. This order shall dispose of LPA Nos. 619 and 620 of 2011, which have been filed by the un-successful petitioner-appellants under Clause X of the Letters Patent challenging judgment of the learned Single Judge, dated 1.12.2010, holding that the scope of interference by the writ Court is very limited in a matter of preliminary examination conducted by adopting the method of Multiple Choice Subjective Type questions paper, because it is not permissible for the Court to examine the question papers and answer sheets itself when the Commission had assessed the inter se merit of the candidates. If there was a discrepancy in framing