CWP No.280 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CWP No.280 of 2011 Date of decision : 24.1.2011 Gurdev Singh ........Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and others .........Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Present:- Mr.Dinesh Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner Ms.Charu Tuli, Senior DAG, Punjab --- PERMOD KOHLI, J (Oral) : Pursuant to the advertisement dated 26.11.2009 issued by respondent No.2 for filling up the 143 vacancies of Punjab Civil Services vide Combined Competitive Examination, 2009, the petitioner applied under the Physically Handicapped, Punjab Category (Code No.76). A preliminary examination was held on 19.12.2010. The petitioner appeared under Roll No.1681328807. Result of the Combined Competitive Examination was declared on 1.1.2011. The petitioner could not qualify under the Physically Handicapped Category. Respondents also notified the marks of all the candidates on the Website. The petitioner downloaded the marks from the website and found that he has secured 39.597% marks in Ist Paper and 56.532% marks in all the papers. Under the condition in the prospectus a candidate is eligible for main examination only if he gets 45% marks in aggregate and minimum 40% marks in each paper. The petitioner was not declared successful although he has secured more than 45% marks in aggregate but having failed to secure 40% marks in the First Paper. This CWP No.280 of 2011 -2- petition has been filed seeking a direction to declare the petitioner as qualified by rounding up of the marks of First Paper from 39.597% to 40% marks. Notice of this petition was issued and learned State counsel after seeking instructions has informed the Court that there is no rule which permit rounding up of marks. Examination in question is for recruitment to the Administrative Services. There is substance in the contention raised by the State. The Punjab Civil Services Combined Competitive Examination is a highly competitive examination and even a fraction is relevant. Under such circumstances and in the absence of any statutory rule or condition in the prospectus of rounding up, the contention of the petitioner cannot be accepted. No merit. Dismissed. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 24.1.2011 akm