# Nitesh Kumar Singh Yadav v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2024) 4 ILRA 151
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2024-03-20
- **Case number:** Special Appeal Defective No. 425 of 2023
- **Bench:** Ashwani Kumar Mishra, Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/nitesh-kumar-singh-yadav-v-state-of-u-p-ors-51737
- **Pages:** 7

## Headnote

Service Law - Recruitment - Uttar Pradesh
Subordinate Service Selection Commission
- Revenue Lekhpal Examination, 2022 -
Challenge to Answer Key - Questions 78 and 93
(Booklet Series 'F') - Question 78 on PURA
scheme (Providing Urban Amenities to Rural
Areas) upheld as correct, despite scheme's
discontinuation in 2015-16, as question only
asked which scheme proposes to prevent ruralto-urban
youth
migration;
PURA
correctly
identified as the only such scheme among options.
Question 93 on Kanya Vidya Dhan Yojana upheld,
though poorly framed, as it correctly identifies Rs.
30,000 as the amount payable, despite omitting
that payment is post-intermediate examination for
high school pass-outs pursuing higher education.
Scope
of
judicial
interference
in
public
examinations limited; questions not wrong or
incomprehensible, and some latitude must be
given to examining authority. Appellant's score
(78.75, OBC) below cut-off (81.25); no relief
warranted even if appeal allowed, as per Rule
8(2)(iv) of U.P. Direct Recruitment to Group-C
Posts Rules, 2015. Single Judge's dismissal of WritA No. 19234 of 2022 upheld. (Paras 17-26)

Special Appeal Dismissed.

List of Cases cited:

## Text

4 All. Nitesh Kumar Singh Yadav Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
151
contention that he was actually presented
from work shall be examined, as per law. It
shall also be open to the Management to
place the appellant under suspension for the
purposes of holding of the enquiry. The
subsistence allowance as well as arrears in
that regard would be paid to the appellant
within a period of six weeks from today.
The decision taken by the Committee of
Management upon conclusion of such
enquiry, would determine the entitlement
of the appellant to arrears of salary etc.
subject to appropriate approval of District
Basic Education Offer in terms of Rule 21,
if so required.
----------
(2024) 4 ILRA 151
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 20.03.2024

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J.
THE HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J.

Special Appeal Defective No. 425 of 2023

Nitesh Kumar Singh Yadav ...Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Appellant:
Sri Ramesh Kumar Tiwari, Sri Seemant
Singh, Sri H.N. Singh (Sr. Advocate), Sri
G.K. Singh (Sr. Advocate)

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C., Sri Siddharth Singhal

Service Law - Recruitment - Uttar Pradesh
Subordinate Service Selection Commission
- Revenue Lekhpal Examination, 2022 -
Challenge to Answer Key - Questions 78 and 93
(Booklet Series 'F') - Question 78 on PURA
scheme (Providing Urban Amenities to Rural
Areas) upheld as correct, despite scheme's
discontinuation in 2015-16, as question only
asked which scheme proposes to prevent ruralto-urban
youth
migration;
PURA
correctly
identified as the only such scheme among options.
Question 93 on Kanya Vidya Dhan Yojana upheld,
though poorly framed, as it correctly identifies Rs.
30,000 as the amount payable, despite omitting
that payment is post-intermediate examination for
high school pass-outs pursuing higher education.
Scope
of
judicial
interference
in
public
examinations limited; questions not wrong or
incomprehensible, and some latitude must be
given to examining authority. Appellant's score
(78.75, OBC) below cut-off (81.25); no relief
warranted even if appeal allowed, as per Rule
8(2)(iv) of U.P. Direct Recruitment to Group-C
Posts Rules, 2015. Single Judge's dismissal of WritA No. 19234 of 2022 upheld. (Paras 17-26)

Special Appeal Dismissed.

List of Cases cited:

1. Ran Vijay Singh Vs St. of U.P., (2018) 2 SCC
357 (Para 14)

2. Secretary (Health), Dept. of Health and Family
Welfare Vs Dr. Anita Puri, (1996) 6 SCC 282 (Para
23)

3. Kapil Kumar Vs St. of U.P., 2023 (12) ADJ 338
(DB) (Para 15)

4. Special Appeal Defective No. 112 of 2024 (Para
14)

(Delivered by Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar
Mishra, J.)

1. Heard Sri Seemant Singh, learned
counsel for the appellant, Sri Siddharth
Singhal, learned counsel for the Commission,
Sri H.N. Singh and Sri G.K. Singh, learned
Senior counsels for the selected candidates.

2. Delay in filing the present appeal is
explained to the satisfaction of the Court.
Delay is, accordingly, condoned.

3. Appellant is aggrieved by rejection
of his writ petition no.19234 of 2022,
whereby challenge laid to the answer to
152 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
question nos.78 and 93 of booklet series 'F'
has
been
rejected.
The
recruitment
admittedly was for 8085 posts of Revenue
Lekhpal pursuant to advertisement issued
by
the
respondent-Uttar
Pradesh
Subordinate
Service
Selection
Commission (hereinafter referred to as
the 'Commission') in January, 2022.
Pursuant
to
the
advertisement
examination was conducted on 31.7.2022.
A tentative answer-key was published by
the commission on 1.8.2022. Objections
were
invited
against
this
tentative
answer-key
till
7.8.2022.
After
consideration of the objections raised, the
commission
published
the
revised
answer-key on 7.9.2023. Result of the
examination was declared on 2.5.2023.
Document verification thereafter took
place in July, 2023. Final result of the
examination was declared on 30.12.2023.
Recommendation has been made by the
commission to State Government for
offering appointment against 8085 posts
on 16.1.2024.

4. The two questions with which we
are concerned in the present appeal are
reproduced hereinafter:-

"78. भारत सरकार की सनम्नसलखखत
में से कौन सी योजना िामीण क्षेत्रोिं से शहरी
क्षेत्रोिं में युवाओिं के प्रवास को रोकने का प्रस्ताव
करती है?

Which of the following scheme
of Indian government proposes to prevent
the migration of youth from the rural
areas to urban areas?

(A) PURA (B) NSAP

(C) SAGY (D) SGRY

93. कन्या सवद्या िन योजना के
तहत, आसर्थक रूप से कमजोर पररवारोिं की
लड़सकयााँ, जो हाई स्कूल पास हैं, को उच्च सशक्षा
प्राप्त करने के सलए _______ एकमुश्त रासश
प्रदान की जाती है।

Under the Kanya Vidya Dhan
Scheme, girls of financially weak families
who are high school passout are provided
with _______ one time amount for
pursuing higher education.

(A) 10000

(B) 15000

(C) 30000

(D) इनमें से कोई नहीिं/None of
these"

5. According to the appellant, four
answers have been suggested to the
question no.78 which are different schemes
framed by the Government. According to
the commission correct answer to question
no.78 is '(A) PURA'. PURA stands for
Providing Urban Amenities to Rural Areas.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits
that PURA although was a scheme
launched with the object of preventing
migration of youths from rural areas to
urban areas but the scheme itself was
discontinued in the financial year 2015-16.
It is, therefore, submitted that PURA was
actually not a subsisting scheme on the date
question
was
posed
and
in
such
circumstances answer '(A)' could not have
been treated to be a correct answer.
Learned counsel further submits that none
of the other three options were correct
either. It is, therefore, submitted that
question no.78 in booklet series 'F' ought
to have been cancelled and even marks
ought to have been awarded to those who
had attempted the question as per the
prevalent practice.

6. In respect of his contention, Sri
Seemant Singh, learned counsel for the
appellant has placed reliance upon the
answer
to
question
no.442
dated
17.11.2016 by the Minister of Rural
4 All. Nitesh Kumar Singh Yadav Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
153
Development in the Parliament, wherein it
is clearly admitted that the PURA scheme
has been discontinued. A note appended to
the Parliamentary answer is also highlighted
as per which PURA scheme has been
replaced by Shyama Prasad Mukherji Rurban
Mission (SPMRM). Other literatures are also
replied upon in order to submit that the
scheme having been discontinued, it could
not have been relied upon as the correct
answer to question no.78.

7. So far as question no.93 is
concerned, learned counsel submits that
Kanya Vidya Dhan Yojana is a scheme
launched by the Government to provide one
time financial assistance to girls of financially
weak families for pursuing higher education.
The scheme of Kanya Vidya Dhan Yojana
has been placed before the Court in order to
submit that entitlement to receive such
amount is only to those girls, who have
passed
intermediate.
It
is,
therefore,
submitted that the question no.93 was
incorrectly formulated, inasmuch as Kanya
Vidya Dhan Yojana was not admissible to
high school pass out and, therefore, answer
'(C)', relied upon by the commission, was
incorrect.

8. Sri Seemant Singh, learned counsel
for the petitioner has further placed reliance
upon Government Order dated 20.7.2016
whereby the Kanya Vidya Dhan Scheme has
been modified. The entitlement to receive
financial aid as per the modified scheme is
specified in para 3 of the Government
Order which is reproduced hereinafter:-

"3- तदनुसार वर्थ 2016 में मेिावी
छात्राओिं के सलए प्रदेश के प्रत्येक जनपद में
माध्यसमक
सशक्षा
पररर्द,
उ०प्र०
सी०वी०एस०ई० एविं आई०सी०एस०ई० बोडथ
उ०प्र० मदरसा सशक्षा पररर्द, उ०प्र० सिंस्कृत
सशक्षा पररर्द से इण्डरमीसडएट/स्तर की परीक्षा
उत्तीणथ 99,000 छात्राओिं को प्राप्तािंको के
अवरोही क्रम में मेररट के अनुसार रू०
30,000/- (रू० तीस हजार मात्र) की िनरासश
प्रदान कर लाभाखित सकया जायेगा।"

9. Learned counsel appearing for the
opposite parties submits that though the
questions
could
have
been
better
formulated yet the questions cannot be
treated to be incorrect questions, for the
reasons enumerated hereinafter.

10. So far as question no.78 is
concerned, it is stressed on behalf of the
respondents that the precise question posed
to the candidate was as to which of the four
specified schemes proposes to prevent
migration of youths from rural areas to
urban areas. Learned counsels submits that
there is no stipulation in the question that
any of the four schemes are either existing
on the date of question or the question
gives an inference that the schemes are
presently in vogue.

11. So far as answer to question no.93
is concerned, it is stated that the precise
question posed is as to what is the amount
which is provided to a girl belonging to
financially weak family for pursuing higher
education. The four options quantified the
amount
as
Rs.10,000/-;
Rs.15,000/-;
Rs.30,000/- or none of these. It is argued
that Rs.30,000/- is the correct answer. The
scheme contained in the Government Order
dated 22.8.2012 of Kanya Vidya Dhan
Yojana has been placed before the Court.
Paras 1 and 2 of the scheme reads as
under:-

"उपयुथक्त सवर्य के सिंबिंि में मुझे यह
कहने का सनदेश हुआ है सक श्री राज्यपाल
महोदय प्रदेश में आसर्थक दशा से कमजोर
154 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
पररवारोिं की हाईस्कूल उत्तीणथ ऐसी छात्रायें जो
उच्च सशक्षा की ओर उन्मुख होकर वर्थ 2012 एविं
उसके पश्चात इण्टरमीसडएट परीक्षा अर्वा
उसके समकक्ष परीक्षा उत्तीणथ होिं, को प्रोत्साहन
प्रदान सकये जाने के उद्देश्य से कन्या सवद्या िन
योजना वर्थ 2012 से लागू सकये जाने की सहर्थ
स्वीकृसत प्रदान करते हैं।

2- इस योजना के अन्तगथत सनिाथररत
मानक एविं शते पूणथ करने वाली आसर्थक दशा
से कमजोर पररवारोिं की हाईस्कूल उत्तीणथ
छात्रायें उच्च सशक्षा की ओर उन्मुख होिं और
ऐसी छात्रायें जो उच्च सशक्षा की ओर उन्मुख
होकर इण्टरमीसडएट परीक्षा अर्वा उसके
समकक्ष परीक्षा उत्तीणथ करने वाली छात्राओिं को
प्रोत्साहन स्वरूप रू० 30,000/- की िनरासश
एक मुश्त प्रदान की जायेगी।"

12. With reference to the scheme,
quoted above, it is urged that financial
support
of
Rs.30,000/-
would
be
admissible to high school passed girls
students of poor financial families, who
pass intermediate after 2012. Submission
is that though the amount becomes
payable after the girl student passes class
12th but the scheme does refer to
eligibility as high school but the payment
is to be released after passing the
intermediate examination. It is, therefore,
submitted that question no.93 is also not
incorrect.

13. Various judgments have been
sited before the Court including the
Division Bench judgment in Writ-A
no.12344 of 2017 on the scope of
interference in such matters by the writ
Court.

14. Reliance is placed upon the
judgment of Supreme Court in Ran Vijay
Singh & Ors. vs. State of U.P. (2018) 2
SCC 357. Learned
counsel
for
the
commission has also placed reliance upon
the Division Bench judgment of this Court
in Special Appeal Defective No.112 of
2024, wherein this Court had recognized
the limited scope of the writ Court to reevaluate or scrutinized the answer-sheets of
a candidate.

15. Reliance is also placed on the
judgment of this Court in Kapil Kumar &
Ors. vs. State of U.P. & Ors. 2023 (12)
ADJ 338 (DB), wherein reference is made
to various judgments of the Supreme Court,
and this Court, specifying the scope of
interference made in different cases.

16. The commission has also filed an
affidavit stating that the appellant belongs
to OBC category and has scored 78.75
marks. His date of birth is 11.1.1996. The
cut-off in the respective OBC category
stands at 81.25 marks. The last selected
candidate was born on 25.6.1992. Refering
to Rule 8(2)(iv) of the Uttar Pradesh Direct
Recruitment to Group-C Posts (Mode and
Procedure) Rule, 2015, it is pointed out that
in the event two and more candidates
obtain equal marks in the aggregate then
the name of the candidate obtaining higher
marks in the written examination shall be
placed higher in the list. Submission is that
even if this appeal was to be allowed yet
the appellant would only be placed at serial
no.103 of the list of candidate who are not
selected. Argument is that, in such
circumstances, no interference is otherwise
required to be made in the present appeal,
at the instance of the present appellant. It is
also submitted that no other similar claim is
pending before this Court or the Supreme
Court.

17. Having heard learned counsel for
the parties, we find substance in the
argument advanced by the respondents in
4 All. Nitesh Kumar Singh Yadav Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
155
response to the contentions advanced in
this appeal.

18. So far as question no.78 is
concerned, the specific question posed to
the candidate is with reference to the four
schemes namely, PURA, NSAP, SAGY,
SGRY. Question is as to which of these
schemes proposes to prevent migration of
youths from rural areas to urban areas. The
appellant admits that out of these four
schemes, the only scheme which proposes
to prevent migration of youths from rural
areas to urban areas is PURA. What is,
however, argued is that PURA scheme
stands discontinued with effect from
financial year 2015-16. Although this fact
is
not
seriously
disputed
by
the
commission, yet learned counsel for the
commission points out that on several
websites of the Central
Government
including
https://pib.gov.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx
?relid=57173, PURA is still shown as a
scheme and it is nowhere mentioned that
the scheme is abandoned.

19. Upon examination of the materials
on record, we do find that no funds have
been sanctioned in PURA scheme after the
financial year 2015-16, and the scheme is
currently not in vogue yet this fact alone
would not be determinative of the issue
posed before us. The precise question
posed to the candidate is that which of the
four schemes proposes to prevent migration
of youths from rural areas to urban areas. It
is admitted to the appellant that out of the
four schemes provided as the option to the
question, PURA alone proposes to prevent
migration of youths from rural areas to
urban areas. In such circumstances, merely
because no funds are released in the
scheme after financial year 2015-16 or
even if the scheme is not presently
operational it would not mean that question
no.78
becomes
wrong.
From
the
formulation of question it is otherwise not
suggested in any manner that the scheme
had to be an existing scheme.

20. The answer to Lok Sabha question
no.442
by
the
Minister
of
Rural
Development is as under:-

"(a) to (b): The Government was
implementing the Scheme of Provision of
Urban Amenities in Rural Areas (PURA)
on pilot basis for providing basic amenities
in rural areas through Public Private
Partnership (PPP) mode. The scheme was
restructured in 2010 with the aim to
achieve
holistic
and
accelerated
development of compact areas around a
potential
growth
centre
in
Gram
Panchayat(s) through PPP framework for
providing livelihood opportunities and
urban amenities to improve the quality of
life in rural areas.

(c) to (c): The activities proposed
under PURA projects include drinking
water supply and sewerage, construction
and
maintenance
of
village
streets,
drainage, solid waste management, sill
development, development of economic
activities etc. The current status of PURA
projects is as follows. There is no provision
to provide funds under the PURA Scheme
during the last three years."

21. As per the answer of the Minister
concerned, the PURA scheme has been
replaced by SPMRM scheme but SPMRM
is not one of the options given for the
answer. The appellant in his reply to
question no.78 has actually claimed SGRY
to be the right answer. Learned counsel for
the appellant, however, does not dispute
that SGRY is not the right answer. What is
asserted by learned counsel for the
156 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
appellant is that had he not attempted
question no.78 it would not have been open
for the appellant to challenge answer to the
question.

22. Upon analysis of the materials
placed on record, we are, therefore,
persuaded to the view that the correct
answer to question no.78, in the manner the
question is posed, would be PURA.

23. We are also conscious of the
observations made by the Supreme Court in
a series of judgments, limiting the scope of
examination of such issues by the High
Court. In para 9 and 10 of the judgment of
the Supreme Court in Secretary (Health),
Department of Health and Family Welfare
& Anr. vs. Dr. Anita Puri (1996) 6 SCC
282, the Supreme Court observed as
under:-

"9. .........It is too well settled
that when a selection is made by an expert
body like the Public Service Commission
which is also advised by experts having
technical experience and high academic
qualification in the field for which the
selection is to be made, the courts should
be slow to interfere with the opinion
expressed by experts unless allegations of
mala fide are made and established. It
would be prudent and safe for the courts to
leave the decisions on such matters to the
experts who are more familiar with the
problems they face than the courts. If the
expert body considers suitability of a
candidate for a specified post after giving
due consideration to all the relevant factors,
then the court should not ordinarily
interfere
with
such
selection
and
evaluation. Thus considered, we are not in
a position to agree with the conclusion of
the High Court that the marks awarded by
the Commission was arbitrary or that the
selection made by the Commission was in
any way vitiated.

10. In the aforesaid premises, we
set aside the judgment of the Division
Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High
Court and allow this appeal. The writ
petition filed by the respondents stand
dismissed, there will be no order as to
costs."

24. So far as the question no.93 is
concerned, we have already taken note of
the Government Order dated 22.8.2012
whereby Kanya Vidya Dhan Yojana was
introduced in the State of Uttar Pradesh.
The scheme clearly provides that financial
assistance is to be offered to girls belonging
to poor financial families who have passed
high
school
examination
and
are
progressing towards higher education and
complete
intermediate
or
equivalent
examination after 2012. The amount of
Rs.30,000/- is to be paid only after the girl
student passes intermediate examination
after 2012. The formulation of question
no.93 is not exhaustive, inasmuch as first
part of the scheme although refers to grant
of financial assistance to girls of financially
weak family who have passed high school
but the fact that such amount would be
payable only after passing intermediate
examination or equivalent post 2012 has
been omitted. Although we are of the
opinion that the question ought to have
been better framed for it to be consistent
with
the
scheme
contained
in
the
Government Order dated 22.8.2012, but the
fact that question does not specify that the
amount would be payable only after the girl
student
has
passed
intermediate
or
equivalent examination, after 2012, the
question itself would not become wrong.
Considering the substance of question i.e.
the amount payable in the scheme, simpler
way of putting the question could be as to
4 All. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. & Ors. Vs. M/S Modern Service Station,
 Yamunapar, Laxminagar, Mathura
157
what is the amount of financial benefit
available to a girl student in Kanya Vidya
Dhan Scheme. This, in our opinion, remains
the substance of the question. The amount
payable in the scheme undisputedly is
Rs.30,000/-.

25. The question posed is essentially
with regard to Kanya Vidya Dhan Scheme
which has been introduced by Government
Order dated 22.8.2012. The emphasis laid on
the question is with reference to original
scheme which is already discussed above and
the amount payable thereunder. Merely
because in the modified scheme, launched
later, high school pass out student is omitted
and
only passing
of
intermediate
or
equivalent examination is mentioned, it
cannot be said that question no.93 has
become wrong. The modified scheme limits
the grant of benefit to 99,000 students and
specified the criteria for choosing such
limited candidates for the grant of benefit.

26. We are of the considered view that
in the matter of public examination where
large scale recruitment are undertaken some
play in the joints would have to be conceded
to the examining authority. It is possible that
the question may not have been framed in the
best possible manner or a better formulation
may be advisable, but it cannot be a ground
to hold the question itself to be wrong as long
as the question can be understood by a
candidate and can be answered. Unless it is
shown that the question is wrong or the
formulation of question is such that the
candidate could not have understood the
question or answered it, we would not be
justified in interfering with the question
itself.

27. In view of the deliberations held
above, we find ourselves to be in respectful
agreement with the view taken by the
learned Single Judge for dismissing the
writ petition filed by the petitioner. The
special
appeal
lacks
merit
and
is,
accordingly, dismissed.
----------
(2024) 4 ILRA 157
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 06.03.2024

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J.
HON'BLE MANOJ BAJAJ, J.

Special Appeal No. 456 of 2023

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. & Ors.
 ...Appellants
Versus
M/S Modern Service Station, Yamunapar,
Laxminagar, Mathura ...Respondents

Counsel for the Appellants:
Sri Shrey Sharma, Sri Anil Sharma

Counsel for the Respondents:
Ms. Shreya Gupta

Contract
Law
-
Marketing
Discipline
Guidelines, 2012 - Clause 5.1.4 - Principles
of Natural Justice - Termination of Petrol Pump
Dealership - Indian Oil Corporation terminated
dealership of M/s Modern Service Station for
alleged tampering in dispensing units (broken
seals, soldering, extra wiring) detected during
joint inspection on 17.09.2020, classified as
"critical
irregularities"
under
Guidelines.
Petitioner's defence that tampering occurred
during software upgradation by M/s GVR
engineer
(16.09.2020)
not
considered
by
authorities, violating natural justice. No evidence
showed petitioner's unauthorized access to
equipment post-GVR intervention. Single Judge
correctly
quashed
termination
order
(05.10.2021) and appellate order (07.04.2022)
for failing to address petitioner's defence,
without remanding for fresh appraisal due to
potential evidence tampering. Scope of judicial
review under Article 226 limited but warranted
due to procedural unfairness. (Paras 18-26)