SC UPHOLDS Rs.1 LAKH FINE ON ODISHA PSC FOR JUDICIAL EXAM EVALUATION LAPSE:

The Supreme Court today criticized the Odisha Public Service Commission (Odisha PSC) for its negligence in evaluating the answer script of a candidate in the Odisha Judicial Service Examination-2022. Specifically, the issue involved the Commission’s failure to assess a response to a question worth 12.5 marks. A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta, and Vijay Bishnoi heard the case and declined to overturn the Odisha High Court’s decision to impose a cost of Rs. 1 lakh on the Commission.

Nonetheless, in light of certain concerns raised by the Odisha PSC, the Supreme Court clarified that the cost was levied solely in connection with the specific error identified in this case, and that the High Court’s ruling should not be treated as a binding precedent.

"In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we are not inclined to interfere with the cost amount awarded by the High Court on prayer of the respondent, a young law graduate, who was aspiring to become a judicial officer. The observations made in the impugned judgment are only in the context of the mistake detected in evaluation of one of the question paper and the same are not a precedent to be applied for future cases", the Court ordered.

Although the Odisha PSC requested the Court to expunge the remarks made by the High Court—particularly those concerning the credibility of its examination process—the bench declined to remove any of the observations.

"How the young generation will have faith and trust in you?" Justice Kant questioned the Commission. "You should have candidly gone to the High Court and accepted that yes there was a mistake and we would like to be careful in future", the judge added, expressing displeasure with the adamant attitude of the Commission (in not accepting the error).

Justice Datta, however, observed that the High Court had not named the examiner and remarked that imposing the cost would serve to make the Commission’s examiners more vigilant in the future.

"A judicial services examination and your examiner does not evaluate one question...3 colleges to which the answer sheet was referred to, they have said in unison that [question No.] 5(a) was not evaluated...even 1 lakh (cost) is nothing...this will make the examiners working under you more vigilant", said the judge.

Regarding the Odisha PSC’s argument that the answer sheet had indeed been evaluated and submitted before the High Court, Justice Kant stated that if the High Court had made a factual error, the Commission could file an application to have the order corrected. Responding to the claim that examiners are third parties and not directly part of the examination process, the judge emphasized that the ultimate responsibility rests with the Commission, and such blunders are unacceptable. "They are employed by you, you avail their services, it's your responsibility ultimately." Significantly, Justice Datta also suggested that if a similar order, like the one imposing a Rs. 1 lakh cost, is issued by the High Court in the future, the Commission may seek to recover the amount from the concerned examiner.