IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 403 of 2010. Date of decision: 18.6.2011. 1. CWP No. 403 of 2010. Rajesh Kumar & Ors. … Petitioners. Versus HP Subordinate Services Selection Board & Ors. …Respondents. ..................................................................................................................... 2. CWP No. 6923 of 2010. Aman Sharma & Ors. ....Petitioners. Versus HP Subordinate Services Selection Board & Ors. ...Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. _______________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Ajay Mohan Goel, Advocate for petitioner No. 403 of 2010 & Mr. Dhruv Shaunak, Advocate for petitioner in CWP No. 6923 of 2010. For the respondent No.1: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate in both the petitions. For the respondent No.2: Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur, Addl. AG with Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Dy. AG in both the petitions. For respondents No.3 to 8: M/s M.S. Thakur, Jeevesh Sharma & Inderjeet Narwal, Advocates in both the petitions. Deepak Gupta, J .(Oral) 1. Both these petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment, since common questions of law and fact are involved in the same. 2. The main grievance of the petitioners is that respondent No.1-Board did not conduct the test for the post of Junior Scale Stenographers in a proper manner. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. -2- To support its contention, the petitioners have submitted that a large number of unsuccessful candidates have got zero marks, whereas all the successful candidates have got full marks, i.e. 40. 3. This Court had summoned the record of the case. On perusal of the record, it was found that in the case of Stenographers test 10% mistakes are allowed, therefore, if the number of mistakes is less than 10%, the candidates gets full marks and in case the mistakes were beyond 70% the candidates would get zero marks. I have personally gone through a number of answer sheets and found that the answer sheets have been corrected in a proper fashion. In my presence and on my direction, my Secretary who is well conversant with shorthand notation had also examined/checked the shorthand notations of the candidates and at random checked 5 of the English shorthand notebooks/answer sheets, which are also found to be correct. Therefore, I find no reason to interfere in the selection. 4. In view of the above, the petitions are dismissed. The record which was reopened is ordered to be returned after being resealed. No costs. ( Deepak Gupta ) Judge. 18th June, 2011 (Krn Guleria)