# Subhash Chandra Dixit and another v. U.P.P.S.C. and another

- **Citation:** (2002) 3 ILRA 828
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2002-10-03
- **Case number:** Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 32802 of 2001
- **Bench:** G.P. Mathur, N.K. Mehrotra
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/subhash-chandra-dixit-and-another-v-u-p-p-s-c-and-another-40015
- **Pages:** 20

## Headnote

Sri B.N. Singh
Sri C.K. Shukla
Sri Pushpendra Singh
Sri Sudhir Agarwal
S.C.

U.P. Nyayik Sewa Niymawali 1951- R.
15- Mode of Examination- vacancy of
Civil Judge (J.D.) advertised- marks
obtained
in
written
examination-
completely
aultured
by
process
of
scaling- held- not justified or supported
by any valid statutory provision- result -
set-a-side.
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
3 All] Subhash Chandra Dixit and another V. U.P.P.S.C. and another 829
Held- Para 42

In the present case, the Commission had
completely altered and changed marks
which
had
been
awarded
o
the
candidates
by
the examiners by
a
process of sealing. As shown earlier the
sealing
done
is
destructive
of
the
examination process and the scaled
mark
depict
an
altogether
artificial
picture wholly different from the real
assessment of the candidates done by
the expert examiners who had occasion
to thoroughly examine answers given by
them. The scaling is also not justified or
supported
by
any
valid
statutory
provision. Therefore, the result of the
examination prepared after scaling the
marks cannot be sustained and must be
set a side.

(b) U.P. Nyayik Sewa Niymawali 1951-
Rule 15- Purpose of holding competitive
examination- to judge the comperative
merit
of
candidate-
any
formula
-
affecting actual marks secured by the
candidate
completely
the
result
of
examination - can not sustain.

Held- Para 10 and 14

The purpose of holding a competitive
examination is to judge the comparative
merit of the candidates. The purpose is
not to award him a division or the scores
in passing a particular class like X or XII.
Any formula which affects the actual
marks secured by a candidate by taking
Mean or average of the marks secured
by all the candidates examined by one
examiner cannot be used at all in
judging the comparative merit of a
candidate. The scaling of marks done by
the formula applied by the Commission
affects
or
alters
the
actual
marks
secured by candidates to a great degree
by taking into account some kind of a
Mean or average of the group and thus
they cease to be a true guide for
assessing their comparative merit. The
scaling of the marks, which completely
vitiates the result of the examination,
has no rational basis and therefore
cannot be permitted in any manner.

The scaling process by which the actual
marks secured are drastically altered by
applying a formula in which the Mean or
average of whole group examined by one
examiner plays in important role is
wholly destructive of the examination
process.
Case law discussed
1984 (4) SCC-27
1989 Supp (1) SCC-574
AIR 1987-2267
1982 (3) Alld.E.R. 154

## Text

_Characters 0–39,861 of 62,517. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39861 for what follows._

http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
828 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2002
different economic problems, the theory
about the personality of the corporation
may be confined more and more.

15. Thus the Supreme Court itself
has stated that with the passage of time
the exceptions to the rule of corporate
personality can grow in number to meet
the
new
requirements,
and
these
exceptions have an expanding horizon. In
our opinion, the doctrine of piercing the
veil of corporate personality must be
adopted by our Courts, in the matter of
electricity dues, as this has assumed mam
moth
dimensions
of
hundreds
or
thousands of crores of rupees which
unscrupulous businessmen are not paying
under cover of the doctrine of corporate
personality. Hence we are of the opinion
that so far as electricity dues are
concerned this Court will pierce the veil
of corporate personality and shall not give
shelter to the businessmen who seek
protection under the doctrine of corporate
personality.

16. In the present case dues against
the company are almost a crore of rupees.
Hence there is no reason why recovery
should not proceed against the Directors
including the petitioners in both these
petitions.

17. There is no mention in the writ
petition of the value of the assets of the
company. This seems to have been
deliberately concealed. Hence it can be
reasonably inferred that the value of the
assets of the company are negligible, or a
tiny fraction of the electricity dues. In this
situation the only way of realizing the
electricity dues is to be proceed against
the Directors.

18. Moreover writ jurisdiction is
discretionary jurisdiction and we are not
inclined to exercise our jurisdiction in this
case even assuming that there is a
violation of law.

19. For the reasons given above,
both the petitions are dismissed. No order
as to costs.
---------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 3.10.2002

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE G.P. MATHUR, J.
THE HON'BLE N.K. MEHROTRA, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 32802 of 2001

Subhash Chandra Dixit and another

 ...Petitioner
Versus
Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission
and another

 ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Subhash Chandra Dixit (In person)
Yogesh Agarwal
Sri S.C. Budhwar
Sri Shiv Nath Singh
Sri Vikram Bahadur Yadav (In person)

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri B.N. Singh
Sri C.K. Shukla
Sri Pushpendra Singh
Sri Sudhir Agarwal
S.C.

U.P. Nyayik Sewa Niymawali 1951- R.
15- Mode of Examination- vacancy of
Civil Judge (J.D.) advertised- marks
obtained
in
written
examination-
completely
aultured
by
process
of
scaling- held- not justified or supported
by any valid statutory provision- result -
set-a-side.
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
3 All] Subhash Chandra Dixit and another V. U.P.P.S.C. and another 829
Held- Para 42

In the present case, the Commission had
completely altered and changed marks
which
had
been
awarded
o
the
candidates
by
the examiners by
a
process of sealing. As shown earlier the
sealing
done
is
destructive
of
the
examination process and the scaled
mark
depict
an
altogether
artificial
picture wholly different from the real
assessment of the candidates done by
the expert examiners who had occasion
to thoroughly examine answers given by
them. The scaling is also not justified or
supported
by
any
valid
statutory
provision. Therefore, the result of the
examination prepared after scaling the
marks cannot be sustained and must be
set a side.

(b) U.P. Nyayik Sewa Niymawali 1951-
Rule 15- Purpose of holding competitive
examination- to judge the comperative
merit
of
candidate-
any
formula
-
affecting actual marks secured by the
candidate
completely
the
result
of
examination - can not sustain.

Held- Para 10 and 14

The purpose of holding a competitive
examination is to judge the comparative
merit of the candidates. The purpose is
not to award him a division or the scores
in passing a particular class like X or XII.
Any formula which affects the actual
marks secured by a candidate by taking
Mean or average of the marks secured
by all the candidates examined by one
examiner cannot be used at all in
judging the comparative merit of a
candidate. The scaling of marks done by
the formula applied by the Commission
affects
or
alters
the
actual
marks
secured by candidates to a great degree
by taking into account some kind of a
Mean or average of the group and thus
they cease to be a true guide for
assessing their comparative merit. The
scaling of the marks, which completely
vitiates the result of the examination,
has no rational basis and therefore
cannot be permitted in any manner.

The scaling process by which the actual
marks secured are drastically altered by
applying a formula in which the Mean or
average of whole group examined by one
examiner plays in important role is
wholly destructive of the examination
process.
Case law discussed
1984 (4) SCC-27
1989 Supp (1) SCC-574
AIR 1987-2267
1982 (3) Alld.E.R. 154

(Delivered by Hon'ble G.P. Mathur, J.)

1. This petition under Article 226 of
the Constitution has been filed for
quashing the result of the Civil Judge
(Jr.Div.) Examination, 2000, which was
declared on 25.9.2001. A further prayer
has been made that the U.P. Public
Service Commission be directed to
declare the result of the aforesaid
examination on the basis of actual marks
secured
by
the
candidates
without
applying the formula of scaling or in the
alternative the scaling system should be
applied to the marks awarded in interview
and the result be declared thereafter.

2.

The
U.P.
Public
Service
Commission
(for
short
Commission)
issued an advertisement for making
selection on the post of Civil Judge (Jr.
Div.) and it was notified that the last date
for submission of application form for
Civil Judge (Jr.Div.) Examination, 2000,
was
30th
November,
2000.
The
petitioners submitted their application
forms and appeared in the written
examination, which was held from 4th to
6th August 2000. The result of the written
examination was declared on 6th January
2001 in which they qualified and
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
830 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2002
thereafter they appeared in the interview
conducted by the Commission. The final
result of the examination was declared on
25th September 2001. The petitioners
were not selected, as their names did not
appear in the merit list. It is averred in the
writ petition that the Commission applied
a system of scaling to scale the marks
awarded by the examiners who examined
the copies. In this process of scaling the
marks actually awarded by the examiners
who examined the copies was completely
changed, high marks of bright candidates
were reduced and the low marks of poor
and mediocre candidates were enhanced.
The main ground for assailing the result
of the examination is that the same has
not been prepared on the basis of actual
marks awarded by the examiners but on
altogether different marks which had been
arrived at by a process of scaling.

3. In the counter affidavit filed on
behalf
of
Commission
(shown
on
23.11.2001). It is averred that there had
been
constant
pressure
on
the
Commission to introduce the system of
scaling as was being done by Union
Public Service Commission. There are
many subjects and large number of
examiners which results in great deal of
variation of standard in evaluating the
answer books. In order to reduce the
aforesaid variation in evaluation by
different examiners, the scaling system
was
applied
using
the
appropriate
statistical techniques and the system is
uniformly applied to all the candidates
appearing in the examination. In the
supplementary counter affidavit (sworn
on 31.7.2002), it is averred that before
introducing the system of scaling an in
depth study was done by a Committee
consisting of three professors, who made
their recommendation on 2nd September
1996. The Commission in its meeting
held on 7th September 1996, approved the
recommendation and resolved to apply
the formula of scaling and thereafter it
was
made
applicable
to
P.C.S.
(Preliminary) Examinations, 1996, and
also in P.C.S. (Main) Examination.
Thereafter, the Commission in its meeting
held on 30th March 1999 decided to apply
the scaling system in all the examinations.

4. Before adverting to the scaling
formula and the challenge made thereto it
will be convenient to have in idea as to
how the actual marks secured by the
candidates have been effected by scaling.
On the direction of the Court, learned
counsel for the Commission supplied the
details of the marks secured by the
candidates who are amongst the first
hundred in the merit list. Table 'A' given
below shows the actual marks, scaled
marks, addition/subtraction in marks and
the
percentage
of
enhancement/
subtraction to the marks actually secured
by some of the candidates.

Table A
ACTUAL AND SCALED MARKS
(MAXIMUM MARKS - 850)

S. No.
Roll No.
Actual
Marks
Scaled Mark
Difference in
Mark
Percentage

1
005573
461
610
149
32.32
2
004122
530
583
53
10.00
3
003368
546
592
46
8.42
4
002101
441
574
133
30.16
5
006161
531
601
70
13.18
6
001677
437
568
131
29.98
7
003744
517
571
54
10.44
8
000632
508
574
66
12.99
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
3 All] Subhash Chandra Dixit and another V. U.P.P.S.C. and another 831
9
005620
441
581
140
31.75
10 003495
517
563
46
8.90
11 001766
439
575
136
30.98
12 003792
479
562
83
17.33
13 001758
434
563
129
29.72
14 005228
579
552
- 27
- 4.66
15 005919
430
574
144
33.49
16 003719
532
557
25
4.70
17 002192
426
547
121
28.40
18 005778
379
549
170
44.85
19 001709
428
555
127
29.67
20 005559
377
545
168
44.56
21 002821
484
542
58
11.98
22 000706
469
548
79
16.84
23 005539
430
544
114
26.51
24 005741
380
540
160
42.11
25 005739
375
530
155
41.33
26 005040
525
529
4
0.76
27 004405
402
528
126
31.34
28 004721
402
546
144
35.82
29 005213
545
533
- 12
- 2.20
30 002853
484
526
42
8.68
31 005747
413
578
165
39.95
32 005616
400
565
165
41.25
33 005972
442
584
142
32.13
34 007711
503
581
78
15.51
35 002154
425
553
128
30.12
36 001440
459
544
85
18.52
37 004252
473
549
76
16.07
38 004696
424
548
124
29.25
39 003983
481
557
76
15.80
40 000573
454
543
89
19.60
41 000893
483
571
88
18.22
42 006551
467
568
101
21.63
43 001006
478
563
85
17.78
44 000143
475
547
72
15.16
45 001601
426
531
105
24.65
46 004339
444
543
99
22.30
47 006608
438
536
98
22.37
48 003826
450
529
79
17.56
49 005522
411
529
118
28.71
50 006837
458
534
76
16.59
51 001341
447
542
95
21.25
52 001942
385
530
145
37.66
53 004156
445
529
84
18.88
54 006628
467
536
69
14.78
55 005782
379
549
170
44.85
56 004529
429
565
136
31.70
57 005527
426
539
113
26.53
58 001278
443
542
99
22.35
59 000774
436
536
100
22.94
60 003609
462
523
61
13.20
(-) sign denotes reduction in marks

Some glaring features of the result of
scaling are as under:
(i) With regard to serial nos. 1, 9, 18, 20,
24, 25, 31, 32 and 55, the marks have
been enhanced by 149, 140, 170, 168,
160,
155,
165,
165
and
170
respectively and the percentage of
enhancement to the actual marks
secured varies from 31.75 per cent to
44.85 per cent.
(ii) The marks actually secured by the
candidates at serial nos. 14 and 29
have been reduced by 27 and 12
respectively.
(iii) The marks of candidate at serial no.
26 have been enhanced by 4 only.
(iv) Though the candidates at serial nos.
18 and 20 had actually secured 379
and 377 marks respectively but as a
result of scaling their marks have
been enhanced to 549 and 545. The
candidate at serial no. 14 had secured
579 marks which after scaling has
been reduced to 552 marks. This
candidate had secured 200 marks
more than the candidate at serial no.
18 but after scaling the difference has
been reduced to 3 marks only.
(v) The candidate at serial no. 20 had
secured 377 marks which have been
scaled to 545.The candidate at serial
no. 14 had actually secured 579 marks
i.e. 202 marks more than this
candidate but after scaling he has
been given 552 marks and the
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
832 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2002
difference has been reduced to just 7
marks.
(vi) The candidate at serial no. 19 had
actually secured 428 marks which
have been scaled to 555 marks. The
candidate at serial no. 26 had secured
525 marks which have been scaled to
529 marks. Though he had secured 97
marks more than the candidate at
serial no. 19 but after scaling his
marks are 26 less than him.
(vii) The candidate at serial no. 14 had
secured 579 marks which were scaled
to 552. The candidate at serial no. 1
had secured 461 marks which were
scaled to 610. Though, serial no. 14
had taken a lead of 118 marks over
serial no. 1 but after scaling the
position has reversed and serial no. 1
has taken a lead of 58 marks over
serial no. 14. Similar is the position of
serial no. 15. His 430 marks became
574 after scaling. Though serial no.
14 had taken a lead of 149 marks over
him but after scaling the position has
changed and serial no. 15 is leading
by 22 marks.

5. The Language II Paper which is of
40
marks
requires
a
candidate
to
transliterate from Urdu to Hindi or from
Hindi to Urdu. Table 'B' below shows the
actual marks awarded and the scaled
marks given to some of the candidates in
the aforesaid paper.
Table B
Language II Paper
Maximum Marks 40

S.
No.
Roll No. Actual
Marks
Scaled
Mark
Difference
in Mark
1
007705
25
25
0
2
005573
0
18
18
3
003230
1
18
17
4
002495
31
29
- 2
5
004122
31
27
- 4
6
003368
25
26
1
7
005747
21
27
6
8
000055
4
19
15
9
001677
10
22
12
10
003744
0
17
17
11
000632
29
28
- 1
12
001121
23
26
 3
13
003792
0
17
17
14
006791
27
26
- 1
15
001039
35
30
- 5
16
005616
27
30
 3
17
005228
28
26
- 2
18
004700
30
27
- 3
19
003719
37
29
- 8
20
002154
13
23
10
21
005778
3
19
16
22
001440
31
31
0
23
006171
34
30
- 4
24
003101
19
24
5
25
003983
6
19
13
26
002821
2
18
16
27
000706
6
20
14
28
006551
13
21
8
29
000098
23
24
1
30
005741
16
25
9
31
006161
0
18
18
32
001766
10
22
12
33
001191
0
18
18
34
002322
8
21
13
35
005919
23
28
5
36
005972
0
18
18
37
005444
0
18
18
38
003194
0
18
18
39
004252
0
17
17
40
005559
0
18
18
41
007158
0
17
17
42
002207
28
30
2
43
000573
0
17
17
44
000893
30
28
- 2
45
007075
27
26
- 1
46
001006
0
18
18
47
000098
23
24
1
48
000143
7
19
12
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
3 All] Subhash Chandra Dixit and another V. U.P.P.S.C. and another 833
49
003420
0
18
18
50
006885
32
27
- 5
51
004331
9
20
11
52
006176
28
28
0
53
001601
0
18
18
54
004339
35
29
- 6
55
'006608
0
17
17
56
005739
7
21
14
57
007019
37
29
- 8
58
003826
0
17
17
59
005040
0
17
17
60
001341
0
18
18
61
004405
0
17
17
62
004721
0
17
17
63
007635
11
21
10
64
001942
0
18
18
65
004156
0
17
17
66
006628
25
25
0
67
005782
0
18
18
68
000256
28
26
- 2
69
005213
33
27
- 6
70
001290
30
30
0
71
003629
9
20
11
72
001278
8
21
13
73
003530
6
20
14
74
000774
0
18
18
75
003609
0
17
17
76
003141
5
20
15
(-) sign denotes reduction in marks
Some glaring features of the result of
scaling are as under:
(i) Many candidates had secured only
zero marks in this paper. However,
after scaling the marks of majority of
them have been enhanced to 18 while
for some it has been enhanced to 17.
The candidates at serial nos. 8, 25 and
48 had actually secured 4, 8 and 7
marks respectively but they have all
been awarded 19 marks after scaling.
Thus, the candidates who secured
zero and the candidate who secured 7
marks have been put at par.

Table C
Law I Paper
Actual Marks and Scaled Marks
Maximum Marks 200
Sl. No.
Roll No.
Actual
Marks
Scaled Mark
Difference
in Mark
Percentage
of Variation
1
005573
88
133
45
51.14
2
005747
118
172
54
45.76
3
002101
61
132
71
116.39
4
001677
60
130
70
116.67
5
005620
85
130
45
52.94
6
001766
61
132
71
116.39
7
005616
109
160
51
46.79
8
001758
50
114
64
128.00
9
005919
85
130
45
52.94
10
005972
116
169
53
45.69
11
002192
68
143
75
110.29
12
002154
55
122
67
121.82
13
005778
90
136
46
51.11
14
001709
57
125
68
119.30
15
004696
86
121
35
40.70
16
005539
79
122
43
54.43
17
005741
84
128
44
52.38
18
007019
109
139
30
27.52
19
001942
52
117
65
125.00
20
000774
105
126
21
20.00
21
003141
111
127
16
14.41

Some glaring features of the
result of scaling are as under:
(i) The marks of candidates at serial nos.
3, 4, 6, 7, 11, 12, 14 and 19 have been
increased by over 100 per cent.
(ii) The candidates at serial nos. 3, 4, 6,
12 and 14 had secured 61, 60, 61, 55
and 57 marks respectively but they
have been enhanced by 71, 70, 71, 67
and 68 marks. Thus, the marks added
after scaling are more than the marks
originally secured by them.
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
834 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2002
(iii) The candidates at serial nos. 20 and
21 who had secured 105 and 112
marks respectively have gained by
only 21 and 16 marks but at the same
time the candidates at serial nos. 2, 7
and 10 who had secured 118, 109 and
116 marks respectively have gained
by 54, 51 and 53 marks.

6. In the supplementary counter
affidavit, it is averred that the formula
applied for scaling the marks is that given
in the book SCALING TECHNIQUES
written
by
V.Natarajan
and
K.
Ganasekaran. The precise formula used is
as under:

( x - M)
Z=Assumed Mean
X Assumed S.D.

 S.D.
Z
is the Scaled Score

x
is the Raw Mark or actual marks
awarded by examiner

M is the Mean of Raw Marks of the
group/subject

(as the case may be)

S.D. is the Standard Deviation of Raw
Marks of the group/subject
(as the case may be)

Assumed Mean will be taken as Half of
the
maximum
marks
of
the
group/subject.

Assumed S.D. will be taken as 1/5th of
the assumed mean.

If after scaling the scaled marks are
less than zero, the candidate will be
given zero mark in that subject.

If after scaling the scaled marks exceed
the maximum mark, the candidate will
be given the maximum marks in that
subject.

In the preliminary examination scaling
will be done at the stage of optional
paper and in the mains examination
scaling will be done of all the papers at
examiner's level.

The merit will be determined after
adding the scaled marks in each
subject.

If the scaled score is in decimal, the
same will be converted into whole
number according to practice.

The standard deviation is calculated in
the following manner:

If five candidates secure 20, 25, 32, 15
and 28 marks -

Mean marks of the group =
 20 + 25+ 32 + 15 +28

 5

 = 120

 5

 = 24
Actual
Mark
x
Deviation
from Mean
m
x -
=
δ

Square of
Deviation
δ 2
20
-4
16
25
1
1
32
8
64
15
-9
81
28
4
16

=178

Standard Deviation
n
∑
=
δ
σ )
(

2
+
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
3 All] Subhash Chandra Dixit and another V. U.P.P.S.C. and another 835

5
178
=

6.
35
=

96
.5
=

7. It is important to note that for
making any calculation in accordance
with the above noted formula, the whole
exercise is done examiner-wise. There
were fourteen set of different examiners
who examined the copies of Law papers.
For finding out the Mean of the raw
marks, the Mean of the marks awarded by
only one examiner was determined. The
Mean of all the candidates who appeared
in
a
particular
paper
was
neither
determined
nor
was
taken
into
consideration. Similarly, the Mean of all
the papers was neither determined nor
was taken into consideration. There was
no comparison of the marks of all the
fourteen examiners who examined the
Law papers. The formula as applied by
the Commission did not take care of the
varying standards which may have been
applied by different examiners but has
sought to reduce the variation of the
marks awarded by the same examiner to
different candidates whose copies he had
examined. The table given in Annexure-1
to the supplementary affidavit shows that
the examiners were mostly given three
hundred copies and the entire exercise of
calculating the Mean marks and the
standard deviation has been done
individually and separately for each
examiner. The working of the formula
was explained to the Court by Sri B.N.
Singh,
learned
counsel
for
the
Commission who was assisted by Sri
Shukla, System Analyst in U.P. Public
Service Commission. He also made a
statement that the scaling has been done
with reference to each examiner and not
subject-wise.

8.

Table
'A'
given
earlier
demonstrates how the scaling done by the
Commission has affected the marks
awarded to the candidates by the
examiners. Those who actually got 377 or
379 marks were enhanced to 545 and 549
marks respectively while a candidate who
had actually secured 579 marks was
reduced to 552. Thus, a lead of 200 marks
secured by a far superior candidate was
reduced to just 3 marks. A lead of about
149 marks secured by a candidate was
completely reversed and the candidates
securing lesser marks went higher and
took a lead of a substantial number of
marks. Table 'B' which shows the marks
of Language II paper depicts the same
position. This paper was of 40 marks. A
large number of candidates had secured
zero mark in this paper on account of the
fact
that
they
have
absolutely
no
knowledge of Urdu language and are
wholly ignorant thereof. However the
marks of those candidates were enhanced
to 18. Thus they have been awarded 45
per cent marks (18 x 100/40 = 45). The
marks of the candidates securing 31 or 34
marks were reduced to 27 and 30
respectively. Zero is zero. Zero multiplied
by a million or a billion is zero and zero
multiplied by infinity is zero. However,
by the scaling done by the Commission,
zero has been enhanced to 18 which
means 45 per cent marks. Zero was
discovered by the Indian mathematicians
in the seventh century B.C. Aryabhatta
(A.D.
476-520)
the
great,
Indian
astronomer, expounded the properties of
zero. But the formula devised by V.
Natarajan and K. Gunasekran makes zero
as 17 or 18 and this has been blindly
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
836 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2002
accepted by the Commission to scale the
marks actually awarded by the examiners.

9. Some one not knowing Latin or
Greek will get zero even in a simple
examination of the said subjects. But if by
a process of scaling, as has been done
here by the Commission he is awarded 45
per cent marks, it will convey an
impression that he has at least a workable
or reasonable knowledge of the subject.
This clearly demonstrates that the very
purpose of holding the examination viz.,
to test a candidate's knowledge and
ability is completely defeated by the
scaling process.

10. The drastic and substantial
alteration in the marks as a result of
scaling has occurred on account of the
fact that the Mean of the marks plays a
major role in the formula applied for
determining scaled mark. As mentioned
earlier, the Mean is determined by
totalling or adding the marks secured by
all the candidates examined by one
examiner and dividing the same by the
number
of
candidates.
Again
in
calculating the standard deviation, the
Mean of the marks plays a major role.
Thus, if in a set of examination copies
examined by one examiner majority have
secured very poor marks and few bright
candidates have secured high marks, their
marks will be considerably reduced as the
Mean of the whole set or group will be
less. The formula itself contemplates that
impossible situations may arise. After
scaling a candidate's marks may become
less than zero or may get marks in minus.
According to the formula he would be
given zero mark. It also contemplates that
after scaling the marks may exceed the
maximum marks. Here he would be
allotted the maximum marks. The purpose
of holding a competitive examination is to
judge the comparative merit of the
candidates. The purpose is not to award
him a division or the scores in passing a
particular class like X or XII. Any
formula which affects the actual marks
secured by a candidate by taking Mean or
average of the marks secured by all the
candidates examined by one examiner
cannot be used at all in judging the
comparative merit of a candidate. The
scaling of marks done by the formula
applied by the Commission affects or
alters the actual marks secured by
candidate to a great degree by taking into
account some kind of a Mean or average
of the group and thus they cease to be a
true guide for assessing their comparative
merit. The scaling of the marks, which
completely vitiates the result of the
examination, has no rational basis and
therefore cannot be permitted in any
manner.

11. Another fallacy which lies in the
process of scaling is that the same is done
examiner-wise only. It is the marks
awarded by one single examiner to a
group of candidates, whose copies he has
examined, which are scaled. This is done
by recourse to a formula which takes into
account the Mean or average of the marks
secured by that particular group. There
can be a strict examiner who awards less
marks or a liberal examiner who awards
comparatively more marks but in normal
course an examiner will apply the same
yardstick to the entire group whose copies
he has examined. If the same examiner
awards
very
poor
marks
to
some
candidates and awards very high marks to
some others, he does so consciously
applying his own yardstick, which can not
be faulted. The scaling formula does not
take into consideration the average or
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
3 All] Subhash Chandra Dixit and another V. U.P.P.S.C. and another 837
Mean of all the candidates in one
particular paper but takes Mean of only
that group of candidates which have been
examined by one single examiner. The
reduction or enhancement of marks of
candidates only on account of the fact that
the average or Mean of the marks secured
by the group (viz. the whole lot examined
by one examiner) in which they fall is
different has absolutely no basis and
cannot be accepted by any process of
reasoning. There can always be some
outstanding boys and some very poor
boys in one group which were examined
by a single examiner. If per chance the
average or Mean of the whole group is
around 50 per cent, the marks secured by
the outstanding candidate who may be of
the calibre of 80 or 90 per cent would be
drastically reduced and the marks secured
by the poor candidate who may be of the
calibre of around 10 per cent would be
considerably enhanced. This kind of a
system can have no place in an
examination which is conducted for
judging the comparative merit of a
candidate.

12. The reasoning for applying the
system of scaling has been given in para 4
of the counter affidavit and it will be
useful to reproduce the same:
".......The grounds for introducing
scaling system have been numerous.
There are various subjects and separate
set
of
examiners
are
engaged
in
evaluation and other processes, causing
great deal of variation of standard in
evaluation of answer books. In order to
reduce the variation in evaluation by
different examiners and to do justice to all
the candidates the scaling system was
applied, using appropriate statistical
technique, and prominent technical expert
have examined the system........."
13. It may be accepted that there
may be variation in standard of evaluation
of answer books by different examiners.
There can also be wide disparity in the
marks secured by the candidates in
different subjects on account of unusually
easy or simple paper having been set in
one subject and an unusually difficult
paper having been set in another subject.
In such a case the candidates opting for
the subject in which the paper was easy
may get advantage. But the system of
scaling adopted here does not obviate
anyone
of
the
aforesaid
two
contingencies. There is no comparative
evaluation of marks awarded by different
examiners of the same subject to bring
them to a common scale. Similarly, there
is no comparative evaluation of marks of
candidates who have opted for different
subjects. In the present case, namely,
Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) examination, there
is no optional paper and all the papers are
compulsory and, therefore, there is no
occasion for comparative evaluation of
marks of different subjects. I have pointed
out this fact in order to demonstrate the
fallacy of the scaling technique which the
Commission has adopted.

14. The marks secured by the
candidates in interview, wherein sitting
judges of this Court sat as experts, also
show wide disparity. There are candidates
who have secured between 30 and 40 per
cent marks and there are others who have
secured 75 per cent marks in interview.
This was the position when the candidates
who had been called for the interview
were the top echelon of the whole lot who
had appeared in the written examination.
The disparity in the marks of the
candidates who appeared in the written
examination would be far greater. This
may be on account of variety of reasons.
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
838 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2002
All those who take up a competitive
examination are not necessarily very
serious. Anyone with any kind of career is
entitled to appear in the examination.
There is a bar of three years of practice
but after enrolment many may not have
devoted to the legal practice and may not
have been in touch with the subject of law
which has three papers of two hundred
marks each. There may have been some
really bright and laborious candidates
who may have prepared the subject very
well. Therefore, the scaling process by
which the actual marks secured are
drastically altered by applying a formula
in which the Mean or average of whole
group examined by one examiner plays an
important role is wholly destructive of the
examination process.

15. As mentioned earlier, the
Commission has applied the formula
given
in
the
book
"SCALING
TECHNIQUES by V. Natrajan and K.
Gunasekaran". It is not known who these
gentlemen are, what are their academic
qualifications, where they are working
and whether the formula suggested by
them has been tested on a practical plain.
The book was published in 1985. There is
no material to show that the formula has
actually been found to be correct by the
authorities who deal with the subject of
education. It will be useful to reproduce a
few lines from what the authors have said
in Chapter 'Introduction' on page 4 of
the book:
"Scaling techniques will have to be
introduced whenever and wherever the
situation warrants. If different sets of
marks are to be added and/or to be
compared they need to be scaled to a
common standard where such standard is
lacking........"

In Chapter "Need for Scaling
Techniques" on page 23, it has been said
as under:

".......The analysis of the marks
awarded by the examiners showed that
they differ in average marks, range of
marks
awarded
and
the
merit
of
individual candidates, even though they
all received equivalent batches of answer
scripts."

17. Even the above quoted views of
the authors are not being achieved by the
system adopted here as there is no
comparative evaluation of marks awarded
by one examiner with that of another
examiner. There is no comparative
evaluation of marks awarded in different
subjects. What is being done is to reevaluate the marks awarded to a group of
candidates by the same examiner. It can
be safely presumed that an examiner
applies the same standard to all the
candidates of his group or whose copies
he has to examine. The same examiner is
not likely to adopt different standards to
different candidates while examining
copies of a particular paper.

18. In view of the fact that the
scaling is applied on the basis of a
statistical formula it will be useful to
have an idea as to what is Statistics and
what is its purpose. In Volume 18 of The
World Book Encyclopaedia (published
in 1990 by World Book, Inc.) it has been
defined as under:

"Statistics is a set of methods that
are used to collect and analyze data.
Statistical methods help people identify,
study, and solve many problems. These
methods enable people to make good
decisions about uncertain situations.
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
3 All] Subhash Chandra Dixit and another V. U.P.P.S.C. and another 839
Statistical methods are used in a
wide variety of occupations. Doctors use
such methods to determine whether
certain drugs help in the treatment of
medical problems. Weather forecasters
use statistics to help them predict the
weather more accurately. Engineers use
statistics to set standards for product
safety and quality. Statistical ideas help
scientists design effective experiments.
Economists use statistical techniques to
predict future economic conditions...."

19. In volume 25 of Encyclopedia
Americana (1986 Ed.), at page 629, it has
been described as under:

Statistics.
Originally,
the
word
"statistics"
was
used
to
designate
collections of data pertaining to matters
of importance to a political state, such as
population counts, deaths, tax returns,
and the amount of internal or external
trade. Over the years, its original use has
been extended to include almost any kind
of numerical data, including major league
base ball records, theatre attendance,
monthly rainfall or automobile production
per year. When used as a plural noun the
word
"statistics"
refers
to
such
quantitative data. As a singular noun to a
branch of mathematics that deals with
such data.

20. As a field of study statistics is
the science and art of obtaining and
analyzing quantitative data in order to
make sound inferences in the face of
uncertainties. A statistical inference may
be an estimate based on the data from a
single experiment or a limited sample of
some
population
or
aggregate
that
contains more items than the sample
contains. Also, a statistical inference may
require a test of some hypothesis by
means
of
information
from
the
experiment or sample.

21. The uncertainty arises from the
incompleteness of the data with which
statisticians work. Inductive reasoning
based on the mathematics of probability is
used to assess the fallibility of an estimate
or test. Furthermore, the measure of the
fallibility of the estimate or test is
calculated
from
the
observed
data
themselves.

22. Since statistics used inductive
reasoning based on the mathematics of
probability, this aspect of statistics is
branch
of
applied
mathematics.
Its
method stem from the axioms and
theorems of probability, which in turn is a
field of pure mathematics. However, valid
and efficient measures of fallibility of
inferences, in terms of exact probability
statements are possible only if certain
steps are taken in a given investigations.
Consequently,
statistics
finds
itself
concerned with such matters as the
collection and tabulation of numerical
data,
the
description
of
group
characteristics of the particular data
observed, the design of experiments and
sample surveys, experimental and survey
techniques, questionnaire construction,
and the training and super vision of
interviewers and enumerators...."

23. Some formulas are also given
which use Mean, standard deviation and
variance as parameters. In the filed of
analytical statistics, on page 632, it is
said as under:
"ANALYTICAL STATISTICS

Two important branches of analytical
statistics are the design and analysis of
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
840 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2002
sample surveys and the design and
analysis of experiments.

Design and Analysis of Sample
Surveys.
In
many
important
investigations - for example, marketing
studies, public-opinion polling, readership
studies, monthly labor-force studies, crop
and livestock inventories, and forest
inventories - it may not be feasible or
desirable to obtain observations on the
characteristics of all of the members of a
population. For such investigations,
statistics provides a number of survey
sampling techniques. ..."

24. In volume 28 Encyclopaedia
Britannica (1985 Ed.), on page 230, it
has been described as under:

"Statistics is the art and science of
gathering,
analyzing,
and
making
inferences
from
data.
Originally
associated with numbers gathered for
governments, the subject now includes
large bodies of method and theory....

The ideas of effective design for data
gathering
are
also
basic
to
the
construction of sample surveys, a branch
of statistics most popularly known for its
contributions to public opinion polling, to
pre-election forecasting, and to market
research. Perhaps even more significant is
this branch's service to government
through, for example, estimates of amount
of unemployment and cost of living which
have become indispensable in attempts to
regulate the economy. Sample survey
methods have found uses in accounting,
inventory control, and other areas."

25. Here also a large number of
formulas have been given for solution of
various kinds of problems, which involve
feeding of different kinds of parameters.

26. It will thus be seen that the
statistics is the science of obtaining and
analysing quantitative data in order to
make reliable inference in the face of
uncertainties. It requires calculation and
tabulation
of
numerical
data
and
determining the characteristics of the
particular data observed. The statistical
data can never be applied to individual
cases, nor the merit or worth or potential
of the individuals can be determined on
its basis. The purpose of statistics is
entirely different and is used for taking
policy decisions with regard to a large
group or segment of population or the
matter under consideration.

27. Application of statistical data to
individuals
may
result
in
gross
absurdities. In India 2002 published by
the
Ministry
of
Information
and
Broadcasting, Government of India (on
page 292) the per capita income in the
country in
the
year 1999-2000 is
mentioned as Rs.16,047/-. Using the said
data, can it be said that the income of
every Indian was Rs.16,047/- in that year?
Even applying a deviation of fifty percent
on either side, it will come to Rs. 8,000/-
to Rs.24,000/- per annum. There are many
Indians whose income is far less and there
are some whose income is in crores.
Similarly, regarding life expectancy it is
mentioned on page 205 that it has risen
from 37.1 years (male) and 36.2 years
(female) in 1951 to 62.3 years (male) and
65.27 years (female) in 1999. Can this
data be used to say that a particular
individual female will necessarily live
upto the age of 65 years and will
necessarily not live beyond that age? A
deviation of 25 percent on either side will
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
3 All] Subhash Chandra Dixit and another V. U.P.P.S.C. and another 841
mean 49 to 81 years, which would make a
world of difference for the concerned
individual. This data can no doubt be used
in the face of uncertainty, namely, for
assessing the life expectancy in the case
of accidental death or in laying down the
health policy by the Government. But it
can never be used where the facts and
figures are known as in the case of
competitive examination where the marks
secured by each candidate is known with
exactitude. Therefore, to apply any
principle of statistics to scale the marks of
the candidates and then to determine their
comparative merit would be wholly
wrong and cannot be countenanced in
any manner.

28. M.J. Moroney, a Fellow of the
Association of Incorporated Statisticians
and of the Royal Statistical Society, has
written a book 'Facts From Figures'
which has been published by Penguin
Books Ltd. The title of the first Chapter in
the book is Statistics Undesirable and
the opening lines are as under: