IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 1ST JUNE 2010 / 11TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 33443 of 2007(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- JOJI C.S., CHUNKATH NIVAS, P.O.KOTTAPADI, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, THRISSUR. 2. THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS, SC, PSC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/06/2010, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 6836 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.33443/07 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ADMISSION TICKET WITH REGN.NO.134330 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE QUESTION BOOKLET ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER CONTIANS THE ALPHA CODE “B” EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ANSWER KEY PUBLISHED BY THE PSC. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.R3(3) 3144/LDC/2005 DT 27.7.2006 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.R3(3) 3144/LDC/2005 DT 8.2.2007 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE PAPER REPORTS REGARDING THE OMR VALUATION. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NOs. 33443/2007 & 6836 OF 2009 ============================= Dated this the 1st day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T In so far as petitioner in WP(C) NO.33443/2007 is concerned, he is a candidate who appeared for the examination held by the PSC for the post of Lower Division Clerk in various departments in Trichur District. 2. In so far as WP(C) No.6836/09 is concerned, there also the petitioner appeared for examination to the post of Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) in the Irrigation department. 3. In both these writ petitions, the grievance of the petitioners is that going by the answers to the questions framed by the PSC, they ought to have secured higher marks and that due to erroneous valuation, lower marks were awarded, as a result of which, they were not included in the select list prepared. 4. PSC on the other hand filed counter affidavits explaining the answers given, marks awarded, cut off marks prescribed and that as the petitioners secured only marks lower to the cut off marks prescribed. It is stated that it was therefore that they were not included in the select list. It is in these circumstances, petitioners are seeking a direction from this Court WPC NOs. 33443/2007 & 6836 OF 2009 :2 : requiring the PSC to produce the answer papers and get the answer papers valued by an external expert. 5. Petitioners have no case that there is any Regulation of the PSC providing for revaluation of the answer scripts. It is the settled position of law that in the absence of a regulation providing for revaluation, Courts cannot order revaluation of the answer scripts. It has been so held in the Apex Court judgment in Civil Appeal No.461/08 concerning the PSC itself. In that view of the matter the prayer for revaluation sought for by the petitioners cannot be granted. 6. The other grievance of the petitioner is that they sought disclosure of the answer sheets by making an application invoking the Right to Information Act which was also denied. It is now pointed out by the counsel for the PSC that a similar order rejecting the request made by another applicant was rejected by the Calicut University and that was subject matter of WP(C) No.9445/09 and that this court by judgment dated 28th October, 2009 has upheld the order of the Calicut University. In that view of the matter, I do not see any merit in these writ petitions and accordingly, they are dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp