Central
Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
OA No. 207/2013
M.A. No. 285/2013
With
OA No. 2574/2012
MA No. 2133/2012
MA No. 2897/2012
MA No. 3099/2012
OA No.3683/2012
OA No.3789/2012
OA No.414/2013
OA No.440/2013
OA No.644/2013
Order reserved on 01.05.2013
Order pronounced on 21.05.2013
Hon ble Shri G George Paracken, Member (J)
Hon ble Shri Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A)
OA No.207/2013
1. Sri Pradip Kumar Das
S/o Sri Jogen Chandra Das
Working as JtO,
Office of DE (BB), Telephone Exchange,
Panbazar, Guwahati-1.
2. Shri Rupak Medhi
S/o Sri Suren Medhi
Working as JT,
Office of DE (Survey), NETF, BSNL,
Silpukhuri, Guwahati-3.
3. Sri Gobinda Chandra Sarmah
S/o Shri Karuna Kanta Sarmah
Working as JTO,
Office of DGM (L-1 Tax), Telephone Exchange,
Panbazar,
Guwahati-1.
4. Sri Amiya Kumar Sarma
S/o Sri Charu Chandra Sarma
Working as JTO,
Office of DE Ext.-IV, Telephone Exchange,
Dispur, Guwahati-5.
5. Shri Manik Chandra Deka
S/o Late Pusparam Deka
Working as JTO
Office of CGM (NFTF), BSNL,
Silpukhri,
Guwahati-5.
6. Sri Kadam Ali Ahmed
S/o Md. Hasmat Ali
Working as JTO
Office of DE (TP-II), BSNL,
Bhangagarh, Guwahati-5.
7. Sri Hitendra Kumar Choudhury
S/o Late Bachiram Choudhury
Working as JTO
Office of DE (TP-II), BSNL, deleted vide order
Bhangagarh, Guwahati-5. dated 28.06.2012
8. Sri Sabiram Kalita
S/o Late Dhanoram Kalita
Working as JTO,
Office of DE (ETR), BSNL,
Panbazar, Guwahati-1.
9. Sri Moinul Islam
S/o Late Ibrahim Ali,
Working as JTO,
Office of DE (OCB),
Telephone Exchange,
Ulubari, Guwahati-7.
10. Sri Habibur Rahman
S/o Md. Naimuddin Sarkar
Working as JTO,
Office of SDE (Group),
BSNL, Nagaon-782003.
11. Sri Sumanta Naid Purkayastha
S/o Shri Susanta Kr. Nandi
Purkayastha
Working as JTO,
Office of DE (Mobile),
Telephone Exchange,
Panbazar, Guwahati-1.
12. Sri Arunjyoti Saikia
S/o Late Nirmal Chandra Saikia
Working as JtO
Office of DE (Mobile),
Telephone Exchange, deleted vide order
Panbazar, Guwahati-1. dated 28.06.2012
13. Shri Gaurisankar Bora
S/o Late Makhan Bora
Working as JtO,
Office of SDE,
Telephone Exchange,
Sibsagar-785640.
14. Sri Manash Ranjan Pradhan
S/o Late Bauri Bandhu Pradhan
Working as JTO,
Office of DE(TP-II), BSNL,
Bhangagarh, Ghy-5.
15. Sri Jagannath Kakati
S/o Late Rabiram Kakati
Working as JTO,
Office of RTTC, BSNL,
Ulubari, Guwahati-7.
16. Sri Sushil Kumar Sarma
S/o Shri Basudev Sarma
Working as JTO,
Office of SDE, Orang Telepone Exchange,
Orang-784114.
17. Sri Swapan Sarkar
S/o Late Sribash Chandra Sarkar
Working as SDO (P), Telephone Exchange,
Goalpara-783101.
18. Sri Subrata Dey
S/o Late Narayan Chandra Dey
Working as JTO,
Office of SDO (P),
BSNL, Kokrajhar-783370.
19. Sri Saleh Md. Mizanur Rahman
S/o Late Reazuddin Ahmed,
Working as JTO,
Office of CMTS, BSNL, Telephone Exchange,
Bongaigaon-783380.
20. Sri Utpal Goswami
S/o Late Brajamohna Goswami
Working as JTO,
Office of GMTD, BSNL,
Bongaigaon-783380 ..Applicants
By Advocates: Shri S.D. Dutta with Dr. Sumant Bhardwaj,
Ms. Anandana Handa for Rajeshekhar Rao &
Shri Ahanthem Heary.
Vs.
1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
(A Govt. of India enterprise)
Represented by the Chairman and Managing Director,
BSNL,
Registered Office Statement House,
Barakhamba Road,
New Delhi-1.
2. The Director (HR), BSNL,
Bharat Sanchar Bhawan,
Janpath, New Delhi-1.
3. The Chief General Manager, Telecom,
Assam Telecom Circle, BSNL,
Administrative Building,
Panbazar, Guwahati-1.
4. The Assistant General Manager (DE), BSNL,
Corporate Office: Departmental Examination Branch,
Room No.222, 2nd Floor,
Eastern Court Building,
Janpath, New Delhi-110 001. ..Respondents
By Advocate: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Counsel with Shri Rajnish
Prasad for official respondents.
Petitioners in MA No. 285/2013 in OA 207/2013
1. Sasikumar D.,
S/o Dayanandan Pillai P.,
Aged 32 years,
JTO, Pallimukku Telephone Exchange, Kollam,
Kerala,
Residing at Vadekkemallakathu Veedu,
Ashtamudy P.O., Kerala-691602.
2. Krishnakumar P.R.
S/o Rajappan P.G.,
Aged 36 years
JTO, WiMax,
NOC Boat Jetty
Telephone Exchange,
Ernakulam
Residing at Palcheril, Andoor,
Palakkattumala P.O.,
Marangattupily,
Kottayam,
Kerala-686635.
3. Arun A.T.,
S/o K.K. Thankappan Nair
Aged 32 years, JTO,
NQM, Mobile Services,
Thirunakkara Telephone
Exchange,
Kottayam
Residing at
Akkarapparmbil House,
Chamampathal P.O.,
Vazhoor, Kottayam, Kerala-686517.
4. Smitha K.S.,
W/o P.K. Shijinesh Kumar
Aged 32 years
JTO, A/T T&D Circle, BSNL,
Ernakulam, residing at Sanu Mandiram,
Karayalathkonam,
Vengode P.O.,
Thiruvanathapuram, Kerala-695028.
5. Dileep P.M.,
S/o Madhavan P.P.
Aged 35 years, JTO OMCR,
Panampilly Nagar Telephone Exchange,
Ernakulam
Residing at Pallikkara House,
Chalissery PO,
Palakkad, Kerala-679536. Petitioners
By Advocate: Shri M.R. Rejendran Nair with Shri Ajit Kr.
Gupta, Counsel for the Petitioners.
OA No.2574/2012
1. Davinder Singh
S/o Sh. Mahender Singh
R/o RZ-60H, Harijan Basti
West Sagarpur, Near Tent Wala School,
New Delhi 110046.
2. Prahlad Singh Bansal
S/o Late Sh. Raghuvir Singh
R/o A-96, SLF Ved Vihar Loni
Ghaziabad, Near Jindal Cinema, U.P.
Pin Code-201102
3. Mukesh Kumar Sharma
S/o Late Sh. J.P. Sharma
R/o 225, Gulmohar Enclave, Near Samart Lodge
Bulandshahr (U.P.) 203001.
4. Mrs. Jaya Majumdar
W/o Sh. Santi Mazumdar
R/o House No 8, South Bye-Lane No-1
Lacchit Nagar, Guwahati 781007.
5. Pubali Bhuyan
D/o Sri Rosheswar Bhuyan
R/o Room no-1, Type-3, Block-2,
Staff Complex, Wireless
Guwhati-781006.
6. Sanjay Kumar Rao
S/o Sh. S.K. Rao
R/o f-48, Sector-10
Raj Nagar, Ghazibad.
.Applicants
(By advocate: Shri Arun Bhardwaj)
VERSUS
1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
Through its Chairman cum Managing Director
BSNL Corporate office, Janpath
New Delhi-110001.
2. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
Through its Director (HRD)
BSNL Corporate Office, Janpath
New Delhi-110001.
3. The General Manager (Recruitment)
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
BSNL Corporate Office ,Janpath
New Delhi-110001.
4. The Assistant General Manager
Departmental Examination Section
BSNL Corporate Office, Janpath
Janpath, New Delhi 110001.
5. The Assistant General Manager (Recruitment)
BSNL Corporate Office, Janpath
Janpath, New Delhi 110001. .Respondents
(By advocate: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Counsel with Shri Rajnish
Prasad for official respondents.
MA No. 2897/2012 in OA No. 2754/2012
1. Mithilesh Kumar Singh
S/o Shri M.S. Rakesh
Working as Assistant Manager, BSNL,
R/o C-65, P&T Quarters,
Vivek Vihar near A-Block Market,
Delhi-95. ..Respondent No.6 in
OA No. 2574/2012
MA No. 3099/2012 In OA No. 2574/2012
1. Rajendra Singh
S/o Sh. Hakim Singh
Aged about 35 years
R/o C-7, P&T Colony, Telecom Quarters
Vivek Vihar, New Delhi 110095.
2. Smt. Santosh Saini, W/o Sh. Lokesh Kumar
Aged about 36 years
R/o T-18D, Atul Grove Road
New Delhi.
3. Smt. Vinod Yadav, W/o Sh. R.R. Yadav
Aged about 50 years
R/o 30, 1st Floor, Satya Niketan
New Delhi.
4. Sh. Bhim Prakash, S/o Sh. Raghuvir Singh
Aged about 33 years
R/o 10C/118, Vasundhara, Ghaziabad
Uttar Pradesh.
5. Shri Ritu Raj Basant, S/o Sh. Kali Ram
Aged about 37 years
R/o G-6/91-92, 1st Floor, Sector-11
Rohini, New Delhi-110085.
6. Smt. Meenakshi Gautam
W/o Dr. Amit Chaudhary
R/o C-1/20, Pocket-4
Kendriya Vidalaya, Sector-82
Noida.
7. Sh. Vivek Kumar Bharti
S/o Sh. J.L. Bharti
Aged about 36 years
R/o 108, 1st Floor
Radheshayam Park
Sahibabad
Ghaziabad-201005.
8. Sh. Ajit Kumar, S/o Late Sh. Ramji Lal
Aged about 39 years
R/o Set No 1, Type-IV, BSNL Colony
(Chambaghat) Solan, HP.
9. Sh. Prakash Chand Kaundal
S/o Sh. Bhikhem Ram
Aged about 40 years
R/o Set No.-942, Block-62
Sector 2, New Shimla HP.
10. Sh. Vaibhav Goyal, S/o Ram Narayan Goyal
Aged about 32 yeas
R/o Ram Photo Studio, Circular Road
Hathrash, UP.
11. Sh. Harjit Singh, S/o Late Sh. Dharam Singh
Aged about 38 years
R/o MS-111, WZ- 443E, 2nd Floor
Harinagar, New Delhi-110064. ..Petitioners
OA No.3683/2012
1. Mithelesh Kumar Singh
S/o Sh. M.S.Rakesh
R/o C-65 P&T Colony, Telecom Quarters
Vivek Vihar, New Delhi 95.
2. Parul Singh
W/o Sh. Vikash Arya
R/o EPT-6 Sarojini Nagar 3rd Cross Road
Near Navyug School, New Delhi.
3. Urbashi Sarmah
W/o Sh. Subimal Sarmah
R/o 183-184 Paryatan Vihar
Vashundhara Enclave
Delhi-96.
4. Sushil Kumar
S/o Sh. Hira Lal
R/o D-83 Nanhey Park, Uttam Nagar
New Delhi.
5. Suresh Kumar
S/o Sh. Om Prakash
R/o 16/3C P&T Quarter, Kalibari New Delhi.
6. Sarwan Kumar Varshney
S/o Mahender Pal Varshney
R/o 35-3A Sec-2 Goal Market
New Delhi-1
.Applicants
(By advocate: Shri Ranjit Singh)
VERSUS
1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
Through its Chairman cum Managing Director
BSNL Corporate office Janpath
New Delhi-1
2. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
Through its Director HRD
BSNL Corporate Office Janpath
New Delhi-1.
3. The General Manager (Recruitment)
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
BSNL Corporate Office Janpath
New Delhi-1.
4. The Assistant General Manager
Departmental Examination Section
BSNL Corporate office Janpath
New Delhi 1.
5. The Assistant General Manager Recruitment
BSNL Corporate office Janpath
New Delhi 1. .Respondents
(By advocate: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Counsel with Shri Rajnish
Prasad for official respondents)
OA No.3789/2012
1. Ravinder Kumar Gupta
Age 41 years,
S/o Sh. K.P. Gupta
R/o 16/2D P & TQ TR
Gole Market,
New Delhi 1
2. Ghanshaym Yadav
Age 42 years
S/o Sh. Haricharan Yadav
R/o Q. no. 2, Type-III
A2A, Telecom Colony,
New Delhi.
3. Neel Mani Yadav
Age 33 years
S/o Late Sh. Sant Prashad Yadav
R/o C-4, Telecom Colony, Sona Road
Modi Nagar, Ghaziabad.
.Applicants
(By advocate: Shri Ranjit Singh)
VERSUS
1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
Through its Chairman cum Managing Director
Bharat Sanchar Bhawan
Harish Chandra Mathur Lane
New Delhi-110001
2 The General Manager, D.E. Cell
2nd Floor, Eastern Court
Janpath, New Delhi-110001.
3. The General Manager
Personnel-IV Section,
Corporate Office,
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited,
5th Floor, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan,
Janpath, New Delhi 110001. .Respondents
(By advocate: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Counsel with Shri Rajnish
Prasad for official respondents)
OA No. 414/2013
1. Sh. K.V. Ramakrishna S/o K. Srinivasa Rao
Aged 40 years, R/o H. No. SRT-790
Sanathnagar, Hyderabad 500 018
Hall Ticket No. 1170110427.
2. Sh. T. Padmini Priyadarshini, W/o Ch. Srinivas
Aged 40 years, R/o Flat No. 201
Sri Padmavathi Arcade, Beside Sharada Theatre
Dr. A.S. Rao Nagar, Hyderabad- 500062.
Hall Ticket No. 2770110089.
3. Sh. J. Shankaraiah, s/o (Late) J. Mallaiah
Aged 40 years, R/o H. No. 12-48, CYR Colony
Almasguda, Saroornagar, Hyderabad 58
Hall Ticket No. 1180130275.
4. Sh. J. Harnath, S/o J. Anjaiah
Aged 36 years, H.No. 415/3 ART
S.R. Nagar, Hyderabad 38
Hall Ticket No. 1180110295
5. Ms. V. Meenakshi Padma Rani
W/o Subba Rao, Aged 34 years
R/o Plot No. 12/A, Door No. 1-29-51/4
Kamalaya Enclage, Tirumalgherry
Secunderabad 500016
Hall Ticket No. 1160110480.
6. Sh. T.V. Goutham Rao
S/o T. Sudhakar Rao
Aged 35 years, R/o G3, H.No.18-27/1
Aruna Sai Residency, Kamala Nagar
Saroornagar, Hyderabad 500065
Hall Ticket No. 1160110442
7. Sh. T. Sampath, S/o T. Rajaiah
Aged 36 years, R/o 1-10-122/2
Street No. 10, Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad-20
Hall Ticket No. 1170110421.
8. Ms. M. Rama Devi, D/o E. Harinarayana
Aged 49 years, R/o H. No. 17-1-383/IP/77
Indraprastha Township Phase-I
Saidabad, Hyderabad 500059
Hall Ticket No. 1160110218.
9. Sh. Gandam Prakash Babu
S/o Late G. Mallaiah
Aged about 50 years,
R/o 5-1531
Chinmaya College Post,
Anantapur-515 062
Hall Ticket No.
10. Ms. Gowri Shankar Patnaik, S/o Rama Rao
Aged 34 years, R/o Flat No. 203
Vishnu Heights, Opp. R7B Office
Marripalem Vuda Layout,
Visakhapatnam-530009
Hall Ticket No. 01160110665
(All the applicant working as
JTO in the Respondents corporation) Applicants
(By Advocate: Ms. Anjanai Aiyagari)
VERSUS
1. Union of India, Rep. by its
Secretary, Telecom, New Delhi
20, Ashoka Road, Sansad Marg, New Delhi
2. The Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
A Government of India Enterprise, Rep. by its
General Manager (Recruitments)
Corporate Office, Room No. 222
2nd Floor, Easter Court, Janpath
New Delhi 110001.
3. K. Muthyalappa, S/o K.T. Swamy
Aged about 34 years
Resident of Flat No. 102, Brindavan Apartments
Plot No. 62 & 83, Bandari Layout
Nizampet Vill.
Qutbullapur (Man), Hyd-74.
4. P.V. Ragava, S/o P. Veeranjaneyulu
Aged about 33 years
Resident of Flat No.306, Royal Residency
Tulasi Nagar Cly, Golnaka, Hyd-13
5. M. Satyavardhan Rao
S/o M. Peturu, Aged about 34 years
Resident of 8-117/1,
Namboorivaripalem
Addanki
Praksam (Dist) 523201
6. G. Veera Bhadra Rao, S/o G. Rama Kotaiah
Aged about 35 years
Resident of II Floor,
Plot No. 358, 8-2-248/OU 358
Shaikpet, Hyderabad-8.
7. P. Ramu, S/o P. Vithoba,
Aged about 37 years
Resident of H. No. 4-2/18-201
Laxmi Residency
Tulip Garden, Puppalaguda, Hyd-89.
8. Ch. V. Srinivas,
S/o Ch. Prakash Rao
Aged about 37 years
Resident of A 307,
Vertex Prestige Apartments
Nizampet Rd., Kukatpally, Hyd 72
9. M.R. Narender Kumar
S/o M. Rajeshwara Rao,
Aged about 33 years
Resident of . No. 12-11-1157,
Boudha Nagar
Warasiguda, Secunderabad-61
10. G. Satish, S/o G. Somaiah,
Aged about 34 years
Resident of Flat No: 201,
Vaishnavi Residency (South Block),
Shivapuri Colony
Malkajgiri, Hyd- 47.
11. D.V. Ramanjaneyulu,
S/o D. Sambasiva Rao
Aged about 35 years,
Resident of 3378/A,
Prasanth Nagar, Kothaguda
Kondapur, Hyderabad-84.
12. G. Shashidhar, S/o G. Krishna Murthy
Aged about 35 years, resident of H.No. 178
Vasanth Nagar, Kakatpally, Hyd-85. Respondents
By Advocate: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Counsel with Shri Rajnish
Prasad for official respondents.
OA No. 440/2013
SASIKUMAR D aged 32 years,
S/o Dayanandanpillai P,
Junior Telecom Officer, Telephone Exchange,
Pallimukku, BSNL, KOLLAM.
Residing at: Vadakkemallakathuveedu,
Ashtamudy P.O.,
KOLLAM-691 602.
KRISHNAKUMAR P.R., aged 36 years,
S/o Rajappan P.G.,
Junior Telecom Officer,
Wimax NOC, MS, BSNL,
III Floor, Baot Jetty
BSNL Telephone Exchange,
Ernakulam, KOCHI-682 011
Residing at: Placheril, Andoor,
Palackattumala,
P.O. Marangattupilly,
KOTTAYAM-686 635.
SMITHA K.S., aged 32 years,
W/o P.K. Shijinesh Kumar,
Junior Telecom Officer,
A/T T&D Circle, Ernakulam,
O/o DE A/T, T&D Circle,
Ernakulam,
Residing at: Sanu Mandiram,
Karayalathu Konam,
Vencode P.O. TRIVANDRUM-28.
DILEEP P.M/, aged 35 years,
S/o Madhvan P.P.,
OMCR, III Floor,
Panampilly Nagar
Telephone Exchange,
Panampilly Nagar Ernakulam,
Residing at: Pallikkara House,
Chalissery PO,
Residing at: Pallikkara House,
Chalissery PO,
PALAKKADU PIN 679536.
RAMESH CR, aged 32 years,
S/o Ramakrishnan C S,
Junior Telecom Officer BSS,
Kodungallur,
O/o. the SDE BSS,
CHALAKKUDY.
Residing at: Charuvil House,
Nattika PO,
THRISSUR.
P.K. SHIJINESH KUMAR, aged 32 years,
S/o P.O. Kunjachan,
Junior Telecom Officer,
OMCR, IMPCS, ERNAKULAM.
O/o. the DE OMCR, IMPCS,
ERNAKULAM Residing
at: Puthukkeril, Near DHSS,
Kanhangad, KASARGOD.
SREEJESH P V, aged 33 years,
S/o V.V. Sreedharan,
Junior Telecom Officer, (BSS),
O/o the BSNL Mobile Service,
Telephone Bhavan,
KANNUR-670001.
Residing at: Sree Nivas,
PO Vengara,
KANNUR DISTRICT-670 305.
ABDUL BASITH P K, aged 36 years,
S/o Mayinkutty B,
Junior Telecom Officer IT2,
Computer Cell, BSNL
Telephone Bhavan,
KANNUR-670001.
Residing at: P K House,
PO Mattool North,
KANNUR DISTRICT-670 325
ARUN A T, aged 32 years,
S/o A.K. Thankappan Nair
Junior Telecom Officer (NQM)
Consumer Mobility Kottayam
Office of the DE BSS
4th Floor, Thirunakkara
Telephone Exchange, KOTTAYAM
Residing at: Akkaraparambil
House, Chamampathal P.O.
Vazyoor, KOTTAYAM 686 517
SAM T GREGORY, aged 38 years,
S/o late T.B. Gregory
Junior Telecom Officer (P),
BSNL, Venmoney Exchange,
Kodukulangi P.O.,
Chengannoor, ALLEPPEY DT.
Residing at: C/o Sunny Abraham,
Thundathil Bethel,
Peringala P.O., Chengannoor,
ALLEPPEY DT.
BIJOY R, aged 41 years,
S/o P. Ramachandran,
Junior Telecom Officer (NQM)
BSNL Mobile Services,
Panampilly Nagar Telephone Exchange,
Ernakulam-682 036.
Residing at: No. 7-D, Royal Fortress,
Manjelippadam Road,
Vedakke Kota, Trippuithura,
Ernakulam Dt. 682 306. Applicants
By Advocate: Shri Nagraj Narayanan.
Versus.
JOSHY DAS Y.S.,
Junior Telecom Officer,
BSNL Mobile Services, GM Office,
Thiruvananthapuram, Residing at Bethel,
TC 11/920(5) , Nanthancode,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
SAHEER S.,
Junior Telecom Officer,
BSNL Mobile Services, GM Office,
Thiruvananthapuram,
Residing at Farhan, Ambalathara,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-26
MADHUMOHAN H.,
Junior Telecom Officer, BSNL IT Cell,
Circle Office,
Thiruvananthapuram,
Residing at Harindram,
MRA-A 97,
Kannjirampara P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-30
SABU S.R.
Junior Telecom Officer,
BSNL IT Cell, Circle Office,
Thiruvananthapuram, Residing at Sannidhanam,
Edappuzha,
Nemom,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
SABEER S.,
Junior Telecom Officer,
BSNL IT Cell, Circle Office,
Thiruvananthapuram,
Residing at Nediyavila Veedu,
BTS Road, Attingal, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
VIJAYAKUMARAN NAIR G.,
Junior Telecom Officer, BSNL IT Cell, Circle Office,
Thiruvananthapuram, Residing at Ardhram,
Bangalaparambu Colony,
KTC Junction, Kanjikode, PALAKKAD.
BINU KUMAR S.,
Junior Telecom Officer, BSNL IT Cell, Circle Office,
Thiruvananthapuram, Residing at STO BSS,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
SHINEETH T.,
Junior Telecom Officer, BSNL IT Cell, Circle Office,
Thiruvananthapuram, Residing at Plot No. 24,
Esteem Villa,
Karapparambu, KOZHIKODE.
BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED,
Corporate Office, Eastern Court Building,
Janapath, New Delhi-110 001.
THE DIRECTOR (HR),
Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited,
Corporate Office, Eastern Court Building,
Janapath, New Delhi-110 001.
11. Assistant General Manager (DE),
Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited,
Corporate Office, Department of Examination Branch,
Room No. 222, 2nd Floor, Eastern Court Building,
Janapath, New Delhi-110 001.
The Central Vigilance Commissioner,
Satarkata Bhavan, A-Block GPO Complex, INA,
New Delhi -110023. ..Respondents
By Advocate: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Counsel with Shri Rajnish
Prasad for official respondents.
OA No. 644/2013
1. Amit Kumar, S/o Late Rajendra Prasad
R/o JTO (NSS), 1st Floor, CTO Building
Budh Marg, Patna.
2. Amit Kumar, S/o Sri Deo Krishna Prasad Yadav
R/o SDE (IN), NMS, 1st Floor
CTO Building, Budh Marg
Patna.
3. Parwez Alam,
S/o Late Md. Nehal Hussain
R/o BSNL, Telephone Exchange
P.O. Naraipur, P.S. Bagaha
District-West Champaran.
4. Rajesh Kumar,
S/o Sri Shyam Deo Prasad
R/o Jaya Kutir, Ashokpuram
Opposite Road No.4, Ashok Nagar
Ranchi, Jharkhand.
5. Chandra Shekhar,
S/o Late Baidya Nath Ram
C/o Mr. Prakash Chandra,
R/o Sector-8/A
B-Road, Quarter No. 2206,
B.S. City
Bokaro, Jharkhan.
6. Archana Sinha,
W/o Sri C.P. Sinha
R/o C-5, Shivangi Apartment
New Barhi, Puriliya Road, Ranchi.
7. Sanjay Gupta,
S/o Sri Jai Kumar Sah
R/o J-4A, The Green Garden Apartment
Hessag, Hatia Ranchi.
8. Ashok Kumar,
S/o Sri Ramkisun Mahto
R/o SDE (Infra Sales-CM),
Network Planning
Consumer Mobility
C-208, 1st Floor,
Administrative Building
ARTTC Campus,
Beside Jumar River Bridge
H.B. Road, Ranchi 835217. Applicants
(By Advocate: Shri Sunil Kumar Verma)
VERSUS
1. The Union of India through the Chief
Managing Director
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL)
New Delhi.
2. The Chief General Manager
Telecom Circle, Bharat Sanchar
Nigam Limited, Bihar & Jharkhand
3. The General Manager (Recruitment)
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
New Delhi.
4. The Assistant General Manager (Recruitment)
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
New Delhi. Respondents
(By Advocate: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Counsel with Shri Rajnish
Prasad for official respondents.
ORDER
Hon ble Geroge Paracken, Member (J)
The issues under consideration in all these Original Applications are common and
they revolves around the impugned final results of Limited Departmental
Competitive Examination ( LDCE for short) for promotion from the grade of JTO
(T) to the grade of Sub-Divisional Engineer (Telecom) under 33% quota held by
the Respondent-Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited ( BSNL for short) (official
respondents) on 04.03.2012. Except the Applicants in OA No. 3683/2013 all others
are unsuccessful candidates. While the demand of the unsuccessful candidates
includes the cancellation of the aforesaid examination itself and to hold a
fresh examination, the successful candidates demand their early appointments as
Sub Divisional Engineers based on the same results, otherwise there are no
disputes on facts. We have, therefore, heard all these together and dispose of
them by this common order.
2. For convenience, the factual matrix of all these cases may be delineated
hereunder. The aforesaid LDCE consisted of two papers, viz., Paper-I (Advanced
Technical Paper), General (Objective Type) and Paper-II (Advanced Technical
Paper [Special] Objective Type) having 100 marks each. The minimum qualifying
marks for OBC candidates was 50% in each paper and 45% for the SC/ST candidates.
The examination was conducted on OMR (Optical Mark Reading) based evaluation.
Each question had 4 (four) multiple choice answers and the candidates had to
select the most appropriate one . The scheme of examination provided negative
marking and in the case of wrong answer, 25% of that question was to be
deducted. The notification for the said LDCE was published on 18.03.2010 and it
was scheduled to be held on 04.07.2011. However, it was postponed due to various
court cases and held finally only on 04.03.2012. There were altogether 27
Recruiting Centres spread across the country and 7471 candidates appeared. On
12.03.2012, the BSNL published a Provisional Answer Key in their website
inviting representation/feed back within 10 days. The All India Graduate
Engineers and Telecom Officers Association, vide its letter dated 20.03.2012,
raised objections about 28 questions in Set-C Paper-I. After having taken into
consideration of all those objections, the BSNL have prepared a final answer key
for paper-I (Paper Code 11). Thereafter, the result of all the successful
candidates were declared on 12.06.2012.
3. OA No. 207/2013 was originally filed before the Guwahati Bench of this
Tribunal on 11.06.2012. The Applicants therein, namely, the All India Graduate
Engineers and Telecom Officer Associations sought a direction to cancel the LDCE
held on 04.03.2012 and to hold a fresh examination. They had, in fact, submitted
a representation on 20.3.2012 to the Respondents pointing out that 28 questions
which are ambiguous having more than one possible answers, none of the answers
being correct etc. The details of the discrepancies shown by them in advance
Technical Paper-1 (General) in set C are as under:-
Details of discrepancies in advance Technical Paper-1 (General),
Reference: SET-C
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = =
Q.2 What is maximum bit rate in Basic Rate ISDN connection?
A. 128 kbps C. 284 kbps
B. 144 kbps D. 2048 kbps
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is B-(144 kbps)
Explanation of Discrepancy: there are three possible answers
Maximum bit rate in Basic Rate ISDN connection including basic channel bits
(2B=64 kbps) + data channel bits (D=16 kbps) + synchronization and framing bits
(=48 bits) is 192 kbps called maximum connection interface bit rate.
If we exclude synchronization and framing bits (=48 kbps) it is 144 kbps Called
maximum channel bit rate or transmission bit rte.
if we exclude data channel bits it is 128 kbps which is actually available to
the customer in Basic Rate ISDN connection and called maximum connection bit
rate or customer throughput.
As question is not clear that question is for which bit rare i.e. interface,
transmission or customer throughput. Out of three possible answers there are two
options i.e. 128 kbps and 144 kbps are available in same question paper.
Moreover, if we read question no-60 in the same paper which is as follow:
What is maximum possible bit rate in GPRS
A. 115 kbps C. 13 kbps
B. 14.4 kbps D. 104 kbps
Answer given in BSNL key is 115 kbps which is actually available to customer
although it is 171.2 Kbps. Here meaning of maximum bit rate is considered which
is actually available to the customer.
One can not differentiate the meaning of maximum bit rate hence in case of
question under subject i.e. ISDN BRI connection may also be tken the bit rate
which is actually to the customer hence most appropriate answer is 128 kbps.
Reference: J.T.O. (Phase I) : Supplement to FEE, Module 7 page no. 45 (attached
herewith and marked as Annexure-1)
Request: question is not clear and there are two possible answer available in
option as explained above hence considering the Discrepancy in question full
mark should be awarded to all examinees.
Q.3 to know the Line Parameters, the command in E-10B is
A. TST-TRM C. ABESEL
B. FSCCR D. None of the above
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-C (ABESEL)
Explanation of Discrepancy: there is no such command in E-10B the correct
command is ABSEL (instead ABESEL). In this situation the examinee who had deeply
studied the question can opt correct answer as D (None of the above) but it
those who have considered it as a spelling mistake can opt C (ABESEL).
Reference: above statement may be verified from E-10B exchange command
REQUEST: this not the English language paper hence option with spelling mistake
should have not been given which can confuse the examinee and there are two
possible answer available in option as explained above hence considering the
Discrepancy in question full mark should be awarded to all examinees.
Q.5 which of the following is true in case of E-10B?
A. it supports CCITT#7 signaling C. it supports Remote Switching Unit
B. it supports Digital Subscribers D. it has Digital Switching
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-D (it has Digital
Switching)
Explanation of Discrepancy: RLU of E-10B cannot work in standalone mode in other
words Remote Switching mode hence it is right to say that RLU cannot support
remote switching but it is wrong to say that E-10B cannot support remote
switching unit. There is clear difference in remote switching and remote
switching unit. RLU of E-10B is itself remote switching unit having T-stage
switching which is well supported by E-10B exchange. Connection unit of E-10B is
also an RSU but it is called RLU just to differentiate that it does not support
stand alone switching mode. If in option C it would have been given it supports
remote switching instead it supports remote switching unit then only one answer
is possible i.e. D (it has Digital Switching) but in this case answer C (it
supports Remote Switching Unit) also true.
Reference: above statement may be verified from the E-10B switch and it s
manual.
Request: there are two possible answers as explained above i.e. C and D hence
considering the Discrepancy in options full marks should be given to all
examinees.
Q.6 Peripheral that allows communication between system technician and the
5ESS-2000 switch.
A. MCC C. ROP
B. STLWS D. All f the above
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-A (MCC)
Explanation of Discrepancy: question clearly indicates communication between
technician and 5ESS Switch means communication from technician to switch and
from switch to technician, MCC (Master Control Centre), STLWS (Standby Trunk &
Line Work Station) both allow full two-way communication between
technician/operator & the 5ESS-2000 Switch & ROP (Receive Only Printer) also
allows one-way communication i.e. switch to technician by printing out Exchange
System Alarm & Others Threshold conditions.
Thus if two-way communication is expected as answer both options A & B are
correct and if one-way communication is also taken, than Option D All of the
above is more correct answer.
Reference: above statement may be verified from 5ESS Switch and Manual.
Request: in question between word is used which means technician to switch or
switch to technician hence more correct answer is D (All of the above)
considering the Discrepancy in question as explained above either answer key
need to be changed to D or full should be awarded to all examinees.
. Q.8 when two exchanges are connected by 2 E1 streams with CCITT#7 signaling,
maximum how many simultaneous voice calls are possible
A, 60 C. 61
B. 62 D. 63
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-C (61)
Explanation of Discrepancy: two exchanges can be connected by 2 E1 streams with
CCITT#7 signaling in two ways. First associated mode in which maximum 61
simultaneous voice calls are possible and second quasi associated mode in which
maximum 62 simultaneous voice calls are possible. More over as per BSNL
recommendation minimum 2 signaling channel must be set for connecting two
exchanges hence maximum voice call is possible in only 60. There are three
possible correct answer available with the option due to not clarity regarding
mode of connection.
Reference: the above statement may be verified from the field units.
Request: considering the Discrepancy in question full marks should be given to
all the examinees.
Q.14 what is recommended temperature range for EWSD EXCHANGE?
A. 5 to 40 C C. 5 to 18 C
B. 5 to 22 C D. 5 to 30 C
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-A (5 to 40 C)
Explanation of Discrepancy: in some documents it is given 5to 40 C and in some
documents 5 to 22 and as per the latest instruction of BSNL recommended
temperature to be kept for any electronics exchange are 23 +/-3 C (this question
is also asked in Paper-2 of external plant and access network and answer is
given 23+/3- C). Moreover it is not mentioned in the exchange whether it is
operating temperature range or room temperature of EWSD exchange.
Reference: attached herewith and marked as Annexure-2 and question No-95 of
Paper Code-23
Request: considering Discrepancy in the answer full marks should be given to all
the examinees.
Q.15 in CDOT MAX XL exchange which of the following facility is NOT available?
A. Timed-Hot line C. 3 Party Conference
B. Abbreviated dialing D. Call Queuing
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-C (Abbreviated dialing)
Explanation of Discrepancy: earlier Abbreviated dialing was not available in
CDOT but after upgradation of new software 2-2-1-9 one year before abbreviated
dialing is also available hence all the facilities are now avail in CDOT MAX XL.
Reference: attached herewith and marked as Annexure-6
Request: considering the facts that there is no answer of the question available
in options hence full mark should be awarded to all the examinees.
Q.16 how many types of cards (PCB) are there in OCB-283?
A. 70 C. 60
B. 65 D. 55
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-D (55)
Explanation of Discrepancy: there are only 35 types of cards in OCB-283
excluding CSN as available in all study material supplied by BSNL training
centre. But here it is not mentioned that excluding or including CSN. There are
various type of subscriber interface units that can be connected to OCB-283 and
CSN is also an subscriber interface unit which can not be treated as part of
OCB-283 if we include CSN then it is not called OCB-283 but it is called 1000
E-10.
Reference: attached herewith and marked as Annexure 4.
Request: considering Discrepancy in the question and answer full marks should be
given to all the examinees.
Q.23 As per the core Synchronisation Plan announced BSNL in 2009,
synchronization supply units (SSU) are located at every
A. SDCC C. SSA Head quarters
B. Circle Headquarters D. SDH Ring
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-C (SSA Head quarters)
Explanation of Discrepancy: As per the core Synchronisation Plan announced by
BSNL in 2009, synchronization supply units (SSU) are located at every LDCC not
SSA headquarters. LDCC is entirely different then SSA Headquarters i.e. one LDCC
may contained more then one SSA Headquarters (like Gurgaon LDCC covers two SSA
headquarters i.e. SSA Faridabad and Gurgaon) hence no correct option in
available in the answer.
Reference: attached herewith and marked as Annexure-5.
Request: there is no correct answer available in the options hence full mark
should be awarded to all the examinees.
Q.31 Maximum how many subscribers can be accommodated in a standard rack of DLU
Local in EWSD?
A. 1024 C. 1000
B. 2048 D. 952
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-C (SSA Head quarters)
Explanation of Discrepancy: A standard rack of DLU (local) can accommodate two
DLUs of 952 subscribers each, and question is asked about standard rack not DLU
so the answer should be 2x952 = 1904. This option is not given in the four
alternatives options. Also type of DLU is not mentioned in the question, as
number of subscribers very much depends on the type of DLU.
Reference: attached herewith and marked as Annexure-6
Request: as question has discrepancy and no correct answer is available in the
option hence full marks should be given to all the examinee.
Q.34 In CDOT MAX XL which of the following activity is not part of Daily Routine
recommended by CDOT?
A. Formatting Billing Counter C. Traffic Analysis
B. Running Audit D. Test of MFC Card
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-D (Test of MFC Card)
Explanation of Discrepancy: as per CDOT manual Test of MFC card is also
performed once in 24 Hours hence all four options mentioned in the answer are
part of Daily Routine .
Reference: attached herewith and marked as Annexure-7
Request: considering Discrepancy in question full marks should be awarded to all
the examinee.
Q.37 signalling and speech path are to be same in
A. E&M Decadic signaling C. CCITT #7 Signalling
B. Mod R2 Signalling D. All the above
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-B (Mod R2 Signalling)
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-B (Mod R2 Signalling)
Explanation of Discrepancy: singalling and speech path are to be same in E&M
Decadic signaling (out of band with Speech frequency but path are same) and Mod
R2 Signaling both hence option A and B both are correct. But no such options are
available in the answer.
Reference: may be referred in manuals of E&M Decadic signaling
Request: considering above Discrepancy full marks should be given to all the
examinee.
Q.47 In WiMax, with outdoor CPE, what is maximum distance covered?
A. 12 Km C. 15 Km
B. 18 Km D. 10 Km
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-C (15 Km)
Explanation of Discrepancy: there is no standard fixed for coverage of WiMax. In
some study material supplied by BSNL it mentioned 7-10 Km, in other it mentioned
12-15 Km and as per IEEE802.16 standard it is up to 50 Km with out door CPE.
Reference: Reference: SC/ST/SPECIAL TRAINIGN MATERIAL attached herewith and
marked as Annexure-8
Request: considering the above Discrepancy full marks should be awarded to all
the examinee.
Q. 51 in CDMA, each paging channel support how many pages per second:
A. 144 C. 1260
B. 180 D. 7
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-B (180)
Explanation of Discrepancy: it is wrong question instead of pages per second it
should have been pages per set. Following data is there for paging channel
? CDMA assignment has 7 paging CHLs.
? Each paging CHL supports 180 pages per set.
? Total pages/CDMA RF chl = 1260
Exact number of pages cannot be calculated for a second since number of pages is
always said in terms of Slot Cycle which is 1.28 Sec. Even if we calculate for
1s it will be as follows.
Half frame is required to send one page message which is of 10 ms there by in
1Sec max 100 page at the max is possible (practically much less than this as
some general page messages like system parameters takes more than one paging
half frame which will be send once in a slot cycle).
Reference: may be verified from CDMA manuals
(Request: considering wrong question as submitted above full marks should be
given to all examinee.
Q.55 In BSNL, for implementing DOTSOFT network which of the following
interconnecting method is used?
A. Star Topology C. Ring Topology
B. Bus Topology D. Mesh Topology
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-B (Bus Topology)
Explanation of Discrepancy: Clients (Dotsoft Terminal) in SSA are connected to
the switch or router through star topology. Router of different SSA may be
connected through mesh or ring topology but in no case it is Bus Topology hence
answer marked in BSNL Key is wrong.
Reference: it may be verified from field units
Request: considering above submission either answer need to correct to A (Star
Topology) or if routers of SSA are connected other then star topology it should
be given full marks to all examinees.
Q.56 In network of Class B IP addresses, maximum how many Hosts can be
connected?
A. 16384 C. 65536
B. 32768 D. 131072
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is A (16384)
Explanation of Discrepancy: calculation of host address in class-B IP address is
as under
First two octet are for network ID with first two bit fixed (i.e. 10) and last
two octet are for host ID
Number of Networks = 214 i.e. 16384
Number of Hosts = 216 i.e., 65,536 (0-65,535)
No Host ID can have all zeros i.e. 0.0 and specifies network address.
No Host ID can have all ones i.e. 255.255 and specifies the broadcast address.
Number of Hosts per network =216-2=65534
Hence correct answer is 65534 but here is no such option available in answer.
Reference: may be verified from IP addressing manual
Request: as correct answer is not available in the options full marks should be
awarded to all the examinees.
Q.61 where is inverse-bending fading typically found?
A. Cities C. Mountains
B. Water D. Farms
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-B (Water)
Explanation of Discrepancy: this question is not clear about what and from which
part of syllabus notified for LDCE as in question no system is mentioned, seems
to be out of syllabus.
Request: as question is not clear and out of syllabus full marks should be
awarded to all the examinees.
Q.69 In PC, instructions and data, which are to be immediately executed, are
stored in
A. Hard disk C. CPU
B. RAM D. Cache
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-D(Cache)
Explanation of Discrepancy: as the question is saying which r to be immediately
executed, the answer RAM is more correct. As CPU FETCHES data and instruction
from RAM first time than it is stored in Cache.
In a PC all instruction & attached data which is to be immediately executed are
stored in RAM before being passed on to the Central Processor (CPU) while Cache
stores data which are to be used if repeat execution is required. Hence RAM is
the most standard answer by all means.
However, if Cache is to be deemed correct. Then it was not unambiguously
specified which cache. As there are many caches in PC, many of them implemented
in software & a few in hardware.
Cache is very generic term a device implemented either in hardware or software
to match the speed differential between processing engine (either HW or SW here
again) and the date storage.
If at all, cache is deemed correct. It is only L2/L1 cache which stores the
instruction/data within the Processor Chip itself. But it was not specified that
way in the Que. Moreover if L2 cache is the expected answer then the actual HW
unit CPU (option C ) containing this L2. Cache is also the correct answer.
Request: considering above submission either Answer Key need to be changed to B
(RAM) or full marks to be awarded to all examinees.
Q. 70 In 800 MHz Band GSM, maximum how many carries are used?
A. 124 C. 120
B. 125 D. 8
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-A(124)
Explanation of Discrepancy: there is no such 800 MHz band GSM is used in BSNL
and 124 carries are there in 900 MHz GSM which is used in BSNL hence question
seems to be wrong or out of syllabus.
Q.73 For providing IPTV service on Broadband by BSNL
A.Type-1 Modem & STB are required C. Type-1 Modem only is
Required
B. Type-2 Modem & STB are required C. Type-2 Modem only is
Required
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-B (Type-2 Modem & STB are
required)
Explanation of Discrepancy: IPTV is connected to IPTV-STB (Set Top Box) which
need to be connected to Ethernet Port of ADSL CPE (Modem) as Type 1 Modem has
one USB and one Ethernet port hence we can use USB port for broadband and
Ethernet port for STB box hence Type-1 Modem can also be used for providing IPTV
service on broadband. Moreover question itself says that IPTV on broadband and
it is not mentioned that simultaneous running of broadband and IPTV hence Type-1
modem as well as type-2 modem with STB can be used.
? High voltage DC is then converted in to a very high frequency AC (20KHz and
higher).
Conversion of high voltage DC to higher frequency AC is achieved by means of
very powerful and fast semi-conductor switching devices.
? High frequency AC is stepped down to the required level by means of a small
high frequency transformer.
? Stepped down AC is rectified to DC of desired voltage and filtered by means of
high frequency filters.
? In one stage conversion power plant the conversion of AC to DC is accomplished
in two stages as given below:
? The input AC voltage (50Hz) is directly converted into a very high frequency
AC (20Kz and above).
? High frequency AC is stepped down to the required level by means of a small
high frequency filters.
? Stepped down AC is rectified to DC of desired voltage and filtered by means of
high frequency filters.
As in question it not mentioned which type of SMPS power plant whether it is one
stage or two stage conversion SMPS power plant, option-A i.e. the input AC
voltage is directly rectified to high voltage DC is also false in case of one
stage conversion SMPS power plant which is mostly used in field.
Reference: attached herewith and marked as Annexure-11
Request: as there is Discrepancy in question and two possible answers is
available in option i.e. A and D full marks should be awarded to all the
examinees.
Reference: may be verified from field
Request: as option A and B both can be the answer of the question hence full
marks should be provided to all the examinees.
Q.79 CPU Processing power is measured in
A.Million Instructions Per Second C. Million Instructions permillisecond
B.Billion Instructions Per Second C. Billion Instructions permillisecond
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is A (Million Instructions Per
second)
Explanation of Discrepancy: actual unit of measuring processing power of CPU is
instruction per second. It cannot be true to say that processing power is
measured in million instructions per second or billion instructions per second
as all such units are interchangeable. If the processor is a Giga Hertz.
Processor then BIPS is valid and if the processor is Mega Hertz then MIPS is
valid even if we talk about CPU of super computer it can even more than billion
instructions per millisecond hence either all the answer are correct or all are
wrong.
Request: considering above submission all examinee should be awarded full marks.
Q.86 Which of the following statements is FALSE/
A. SMPS Power Plants offer improved power factor C. VRLA Batteries
do not require any maintenance
B. SMPS Power Plants offer scope for modular D. VRLA Batteries
Expansion should be connected to
Conventional power plant
Answer marked in Provisional Key supplied by BSNL is-B )VRLA Batteries do not
require any maintenance)
Explanation of Discrepancy: inspection and supervision are entirely having no
relevance with maintenance. VERLA battery require inspection and supervisions
but it is completely wrong to say that VRLA batteries required maintenance as it
is also called maintenance free. Hence option-C is also FALSE.
Reference: attached herewith and marked as Annexure-9 (ldce 2007 Paper-2 Answer
provided by BSNL on VRLA battery) and also may be verified from VRLA Battery
manuals.
Request: as no one available in the answer are FALSE statement hence full mark
should be awarded to all examinee.
Q.88 With regard to Fire Safety measures, which of the following is FALSE
A. For extinguishing Fire in ordinary combustible materials (Class-A),
Water/FOAM can be used
B. For extinguishing Fire in inflammable liquids, gases etc. (Class-B),
FOAM/CO2/Dry Power can be used
C. For extinguishing Fire in live electrical equipment (Class-C), CO2/HALON can
be used
D. All the exchanges of 2K or above shall be provided with automatic fire
detection
Answer marked in Provisional Key supplied by BSNL is-D (All the exchanges of 2K
or above shall be provided with automatic detection)
Explanation of Discrepancy: in the AT manual it is clearly mentioned that as per
DOT all the exchanges of2K or above shall be provided with automatic fire
detection and below 2K there should be manual fire alarm system hence Option-D
cannot be the false statement. All the available options are True statement.
Reference: At Manual of BSNL attached herewith and marked as Annexure-10.
Request: as all the option available in the answer are true statement and no
option is FALSE, full mark should be awarded to all the examinees.
Q.91 In VRLA Battery, what is normally set Voltage of each Cell?
A. 2.23 V C. 2.00 V
B. 2.12 V D. 2.3 V
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL-A(2.23v)
Explanation of Discrepancy: There is no such standard nomenclature called
normalcy set voltage . It is very ambiguously specified question. What is deemed
by normally set Voltage is it set to FLOAT or set to CHARGE or set to BOOST.
Since it is not a standard nomenclature it should have been given, what is
expected and all the answers in the key are with the in standard nomenclature
values and cannot be assumed what actually is expected. It can be normally set
voltage in theoretically (nominal voltage), it can be normally set voltage after
manufacturing or open circuit voltage, it can be normally set voltage at float
condition (2.23 V to 2.5 V) or it can be normally set voltage on charging
condition (2.3 V). However, normal voltage of each cell of VRLA Battery is 48/24
+ 2.00 V (Option C ).
Same question asked in GSM Specialization paper, there as per the answer key 2.0
Volts is the answer and here it is 2.23 given in KEYS uploaded.
Reference: may be verified from battery manual and Paper-2 of GSM in this LDCE.
Request: as there Discrepancy in question full marks should be awarded to all
the examinee in the light of above explanation.
Q.94. In case of Line parameters for POT, which of the following is FALSE?
A. insulation resistance across each wire to earth should be more then 1M Ohm
B. Up to 6 V DC across each wire to earth is permissible
C. Up to 12 V AC across each wire to earth is permissible
D. All the Above.
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-C (Up to 12 V AC across
each wire to earth is permissible)
Explanation of Discrepancy: Insulation resistance should be > 3M Ohms not IM Ohm
there by Option A is also FALSE. 6V DC can bias 75-80 V ringing current and can
damage telephone instruction and even the Exchange line cards so Option B is
also wrong, if only Option C is correct answer i.e. FALSE Statement then option
D is also FALSE statement which says all the above, i.e., Option A, B and C are
FALSE statement, in this situation Option-D (All the above) is correct answer
for the question.
Request: options given in the answer are abmiguous hence full mark should be
awarded to all the examinee.
Q.97 Maximum frequency range of cooper pair is in
A. Kilo hertz C. Giga Hertz
B. Mega Hertz D. Teera Hertz
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-B (Mega Hertz)
Explanation of Discrepancy copper pair is basically designed for voice
communication having frequency range (0.3 KHz to 4 KHz) and also called band
limited communication media. By using special technology of DSL it can be
engineered to carry frequency up to 1.2 Mhz. when ever we called range it is
always X unit to Y unit where unit are interchangeable i.e. it may be Kilo,
Mega, Giga or Terra. Absolute value is used to define range but in no case Unit
can be defined as range. More over if we take unit as a range it should cover
whole range i.e. here copper pair covers whole range of Kilo Hertz (1 KHz to
99.99 KHz) but it not covers whole range of Mega Hertz (I MHz to 99.99 MHz)
hence answer A can be treated as correct answer.
Request: there is Discrepancy in question as explained above hence full mark
should be awarded to all the examinees.
Q.98 In the conversion from AC to DC by SMPS Power Plant, which of the following
is False?
A. the input AC voltage is directly rectified to high voltage DC
B. high frequency AC is stepped down to the required level
C. steeped down AC is rectified to DC of desired voltage
D. the output DC voltage is maintained at 52.5 volts
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-D (the output DC voltage is
maintained at 52.5 volts)
Explanation of Discrepancy: there are two kind of SMPS Power plant 1) two stage
conversion SMPS power plant and 2) one stage conversion power plant which is
mostly used in BSNL
In two stage conversion power plant the conversion of AC to DC is accomplished
in two stages as given below:
i) First Stage conversion:
the input AC voltage is directly rectified and converter in high voltage DC.
ii) Second Stage Conversion:
Rectified high voltage DC is stored in capacitors.
Q.99 with regard maintenance checks for engine alternator set, which of the
following is FALSE?
A. Check Fuel level daily C. check engine oil level and leakage weekly
B. Check fan belt and its benison weekly D. Check starting battery
Voltage & terminals fortnightly.
Answer marked in Provisional key supplied by BSNL is-C (check engine oil level
and leakage weekly)
Explanation of Discrepancy: first of all in every working DG, maintenance
activity is referred more in terms of working Hours instead of days or weeks or
fortnight or months. More eve it also depends on make and capacity of DG Set.
Different routines are given in different study material of BSNL. It is unknown
that from which study material questioned is prepared hence examinees can be
asked to answer as the question per the study material from where question is
prepared.
Reference: attached herewith and marked as Annexure-12 (here it given that check
belt tension fortnightly)
Request: considering Discrepancy in question full mark should be awarded to all
the examinees.
4. According to them, the discrepancies and ambiguities in those questions
vitiated the entire process of selection of candidates. Some of the Applicants
in those OAs have, therefore, sought a direction for cancellation of the entire
examination held already and to hold a fresh examination. Some other Applicants
have sought a direction to the Respondents not to hold the DPC for promotion on
the basis of seniority-cum-fitness, till they are promoted under the aforesaid
33% quota. There are other Applicants who have sought a direction to the to the
Respondents to award one mark each for such questions which have more than one
correct answer which have not been answered by them due to fear of negative
marking. There are also demand for setting aside the result already published by
the BSNL and to direct the Respondents to allot correct marks to them and to
promote them thereafter. However, after detailed arguments by the counsel for
parties, there is consensus among them that there shall not be any cancellation
of the LDCE already held or to hold any fresh examination.
5. According to the Respondents the objections/representations received against
the Provisional Answer Key were referred to concerned paper setter as well as
expert panel. The paper setter in his report has mentioned that many objections
were raised on hypothetical assumptions not based on the context . However, the
paper setter reviewed answers in SET-A B,C, and D and modified the answer key to
the question Nos. 3,6,14,23,55,56,61,70, 79 & 88 in Set-C. The expert panel
submitted its report vide its letter no ND/NCES/1-1/Vo 34/44 dated 28.05.2012
and in Para No. 3 thereof, it was stated that during deliberations of the
committee, it came across some questions, of which all the options mentioned in
the paper were wrong. For those questions, it recommended to award full marks.
They have also opined that answers mentioned in the provisional key for all
questions except question Nos.3, 6, 10, 13, 14, 16, 31, 34, 55, 56, 56, 70 and
88 are all right. They undertook similar exercise in respect of other sets also.
Thereafter, the Respondent-BSNL considered the observations and recommendation
of paper setter and expert panel in detail and came out with its own answers.
For example, the opinion of the expert committee in respect of question No.3 was
that both options C and D are correct and those who answered them, full marks to
be awarded. However, the BSNL took the stand that option D alone shall be taken
as the right answer. The final stand taken by BSNL in respect of all the
aforesaid disputed questions are detailed below:-
LDCE for the promotion to SDE(T) -33% quota held on 04.03.2012
Grant of marks as per the recommendation of Expert Committee for preparation of
final answer key comparison statement of different booklets
Question Nos. in SET
A B C D
Both option C and D be taken as correct answer and given full marks. D has been
taken as right answer being technically right. 32 20 3 23
Option D be taken as correct answer. Considering the recommendation of expert
committee as well as paper setter, three options viz A,B,D found as correct
answers. Hence one full mark awared to all. 21 1 6 18
As all the options are wrong, full marks may be given to all On full mark
awarded to all. 4 27 10 18
As all the options are wrong, full marks may be given to all On full mark
awarded to all. 27 11 13 39
As all the options are wrong, full marks may be given to all On full mark
awarded to all. 36 14 14 30
As all the options are wrong, full marks may be given to all On full mark
awarded to all. 38 18 16 26
As all the options are wrong, full marks may be given to all On full mark
awarded to all. 20 10 31 10
Option C be taken as correct answer Option C taken as correct answer 6 21 34 29
Option A be taken as correct answer Also taking into consideration of the
recommendations of paper setter, Options A & D taken as correct answer. 59 51 55
77
As all the options are wrong, full marks may be given to all. One full mark
awarded to all. 69 59 56 62
As all the options are wrong, full marks may be given to all. One full mark
awarded to all. 55 72 70 64
As all the options are wrong, full marks may be given to all. One full mark
awarded to all. 84 88 88 85
6. This OA was originally filed before the Guwahati Bench of this Tribunal and
when it was considered for admission, vide its order dated 21.06.2012, they
granted the interim relief sought by the Applicants and restrained the
respondents to consider promotion of the candidates to the cadre of Sub
Divisional Engineer (Telecom) based on the result of the aforesaid examination
held on 04.03.2012 without the leave of the court. The said interim direction is
still continuing. As a result, a number of candidates who qualified in the
aforesaid LDCE as per the list published by the BSNL have approached this
Tribunal through Miscellaneous Applications for impleadment. Accordingly, vide
MA No. 985/2013 in OA No. 207/2013 the following 5 persons got themselves
impleaded as private respondents:-
1. Sasikumar D.,
S/o Dayanandan Pillai P.,
Aged 32 years,
JTO, Pallimukku Telephone Exchange, Kollam,
Kerala,
Residing at Vadekkemallakathu Veedu,
Ashtamudy P.O.,
Kerala-691602.
2. Krishnakumar P.R.
S/o Rajappan P.G.,
Aged 36 years
JTO, WiMax,
NOC Boat Jetty
Telephone Exchange,
Ernakulam
Residing at Palcheril, Andoor,
Palakkattumala P.O.,
Marangattupily,
Kottayam,
Kerala-686635.
3. Arun A.T.,
S/o K.K. Thankappan Nair
Aged 32 years, JTO,
NQM, Mobile Services,
Thirunakkara Telephone Exchange,
Kottayam
Residing at Akkarapparmbil House,
Chamampathal P.O.,
Vazhoor, Kottayam, Kerala-686517.
4. Smitha K.S.,
W/o P.K. Shijinesh Kumar
Aged 32 years
JTO, A/T T&D Circle, BSNL,
Ernakulam, residing at Sanu Mandiram,
Karayalathkonam,
Vengode P.O.,
Thiruvanathapuram, Kerala-695028.
5. Dileep P.M.,
S/o Madhavan P.P.
Aged 35 years, JTO OMCR,
Panampilly Nagar Telephone Exchange,
Ernakulam
Residing at Pallikkara House,
Chalissery PO, Palakkad,Kerala-679536 .
OA No.2574/2012
7. This OA has been filed before this Bench by 6 unsuccessful candidates in the
aforesaid LDCE held on 04.03.2012. In this OA also, an interim order was passed
on 09.08.2012 restraining the Respondents from making any promotion pursuant to
the result of the said examination. As in OA No.207/2013, in this OA also
following private respondents have filed MA No. 2897/2012 and MA No. 3099/2012
got themselves impleaded as Private Respondents:-
MA 2897/2012
1. Mithilesh Kumar Singh
S/o Shri M.S. Rakesh
Working as Assistant Manager, BSNL,
R/o C-65, P&T Quarters,
Vivek Vihar near A-Block Market, Delhi-95 .
MA No. 3099/2012
1. Rajendra Singh
S/o Sh. Hakim Singh
Aged about 35 years
R/o C-7, P&T Colony, Telecom Quarters
Vivek Vihar, New Delhi 110095.
2. Smt. Santosh Saini, W/o Sh. Lokesh Kumar
Aged about 36 years
R/o T-18D, Atul Grove Road, New Delhi.
3. Smt. Vinod Yadav, W/o Sh. R.R. Yadav
Aged about 50 years
R/o 30, 1st Floor, Satya Niketan, New Delhi.
4. Sh. Bhim Prakash, S/o Sh. Raghuvir Singh
Aged about 33 years
R/o 10C/118, Vasundhara, Ghaziabad
Uttar Pradesh.
5. Shri Ritu Raj Basant, S/o Sh. Kali Ram
Aged about 37 years
R/o G-6/91-92, 1st Floor, Sector-11
Rohini, New Delhi-110085.
6. Smt. Meenakshi Gautam
W/o Dr. Amit Chaudhary
R/o C-1/20, Pocket-4
Kendriya Vidalaya, Sector-82, Noida.
7. Sh. Vivek Kumar Bharti
S/o Sh. J.L. Bharti
Aged about 36 years
R/o 108, 1st Floor
Radheshayam Park
Sahibabad Ghaziabad-201005.
8. Sh. Ajit Kumar, S/o Late Sh. Ramji Lal
Aged about 39 years
R/o Set No 1, Type-IV, BSNL Colony
(Chambaghat) Solan, HP.
9. Sh. Prakash Chand Kaundal
S/o Sh. Bhikhem Ram
Aged about 40 years
R/o Set No.-942, Block-62
Sector 2, New Shimla HP.
10. Sh. Vaibhav Goyal, S/o Ram Narayan Goyal
Aged about 32 yeas
R/o Ram Photo Studio, Circular Road
Hathrash, UP.
11. Sh. Harjit Singh, S/o Late Sh. Dharam Singh
Aged about 38 years
R/o MS-111, WZ- 443E, 2nd Floor
Harinagar, New Delhi-110064 .
OA No.3683/2012 and OA No.3789/2012
8. Both these OAs are also filed before this Bench. While the relief sought in
OA No. 3789/2012 is identical to other OAs, OA No.3683/2012 has been filed by
the successful candidates in the LDCE held ion 04.03.2012. Their prayer in the
OA is to promote them to the post of SDE based on the result of aforesaid LDCE.
OA No.414/2013
9. This OA was originally filed before the Hyderabad Bench and later on
transferred to this Bench.
OA No. 440/2013
10. This OA was originally filed before the Earnakulam Bench of this Tribunal
and transferred to this Bench.
OA No.644/2013
11. This OA was originally filed before the Patna Bench of this Tribunal and
transferred to this Bench.
12. The learned counsel for the Applicants have relied upon the following
judgments in support of their contentions/reliefs made/sought in the respective
OAs:-
(1) Kanpur University through Vice Chancellor and Others Vs. Samir Gupta and
Others 1983 (4) SCC 309. In this case the questions under consideration was the
following:-
If a paper-setter commits an error while indicating the correct answer to a
question set by him, can the students who answer that question correctly be
failed for the reason that though their answer is correct, it does not accord
with the answer
supplied by the paper-setter to the University as the correct answer? The answer
which the paper-setter supplies to the University as the correct answer is
called the 'key answer'. No one can accuse the teacher of not knowing the
correct answer to the question set by him. But it seems that, occasionally, not
enough care is taken by the teachers to set questions which are free from
ambiguity and to supply key answers which are correct beyond reasonable
controversy. The keys supplied by the paper-setters in these cases, raised more
questions than they solved .
In this case, in fact the Apex Court was upholding judgment of the Allahabad
High Court wherein, after having copiously referred to standard text-books, it
was held that the key answer was not correct and the answers given by the
students were correct and directed the University Authorities to reassess the
answer books and to award additional marks.
(2) Manish Ujwal and Others Vs. Maharishi Dayanand Saraswati University and
Others JT 2005 (8) SC 382. The facts in this case are that the student community
filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court challenging their ranking
in the Entrance Tests conducted by Maharishi Dayanand University on 9-5-2005,
10-5-2005 and 11-5-2005, for admission to medical and dental courses in various
colleges in the State of Rajasthan. The grievance of the students was that
various key answers on the basis whereof the answer-sheets were evaluated were
wrong and, consequently, wrong and erroneous ranking was prepared. Allowing the
case, the Apex Court ordered re-evaluation of all the questions by feeding
correct answers. The relevant part of the said judgment is as under:-
9. The High Court has committed a serious illegality in coming to the conclusion
that "it cannot be said with certainty that answers to the six questions given
in the key answers were erroneous and incorrect". As already noticed, the key
answers are palpably and demonstrably erroneous. In that view of the matter, the
student community, whether the appellants or intervenors or even those who did
not approach the High Court or this Court, cannot be made to suffer on account
of errors committed by the University. For the present, we say no more because
there is nothing on record as to how this error crept up in giving the erroneous
key answers and who was negligent. At the same time, however, it is necessary to
note that the University and those who prepare the key answers have to be very
careful and abundant caution is necessary in these matters for more than one
reason. We mention few of those; first and paramount reason being the welfare of
the student as a wrong key answer can result in the merit being made a casualty.
One can well understand the predicament of a young student at the threshold of
his or her career if despite giving correct answer, the student suffers as a
result of wrong and demonstrably erroneous key answers; the second reason is
that the courts are slow in interfering in educational matters which, in turn,
casts a higher responsibility on the University while preparing the key answers;
and thirdly, in cases of doubt, the benefit goes in favour of the University and
not in favour of the students. If this attitude of casual approach in providing
key answers is adopted by the persons concerned, directions may have to be
issued for taking appropriate action, including disciplinary action, against
those responsible for wrong and demonstrably erroneous key answers, but we
refrain from issuing such directions in the present case.
The second counselling for the admission abovementioned, we are informed, is
fixed from 25th August, 2005, onwards. We direct re-evaluation of all the
questions by feeding correct answers, as abovenoticed, and on that basis correct
number of marks obtained by all the students should be assigned and their
ranking prepared. This exercise shall be completed within a period of three days
from today. List so prepared shall be put on internet soon thereafter as also be
published in the newspapers wherein it was earlier published. The second
counselling and admissions hereinafter in the medical and dental courses in the
State of Rajasthan in government colleges as also in the private colleges
insofar as the State quota is concerned would be made on the basis of ranking as
per the list which will now be prepared by the University pursuant to the
directions of this Court. The merit list shall be prepared for the same number
of students as it was prepared earlier while declaring the results on 22-5-2005
and 23-5-2005.
10. For the aforesaid reasons, we set aside the impugned judgment of the High
Court, allow the appeals and impose on Respondent 1 University cost amounting to
rupees one lakh, which amount shall be kept by the University in a separate
account to be utilised only for the welfare of the student community .
(3) Gunajan Sinha Jain Vs. Registrar General, High Court of Delhi (Writ Petition
(C) No. 449/2012 and other connected cases) decided by the Delhi High Court on
09.04.2012. In this batch of petitions, petitioners sought quashing of the
notice whereby on the basis of performance in the Delhi Judicial Service
(Preliminary) Examination held on 18.12.2011, 276 candidates have been
short-listed for being provisionally admitted to the Delhi Judicial Service
Examination (Written), subject to verification of their eligibility. The
petitioners also sought a writ directing the Delhi High Court to evaluate the
marks afresh of all the candidates who appeared for the said DJS Exam based on
the corrections/ deletions/ amendments to the questions and answer keys. The
petitioners also prayed for restraining the Delhi High Court from conducting the
Delhi Judicial Service Examination (Main) till the entire results of the said
DJS Exam are processed afresh. The instructions to the candidates in the said
examination, inter alia, stipulated as under:-
5. The duration of the test is 2 hours 30 minutes.
6. There are 200 questions. Each question has four answer options marked (1),
(2), (3) and (4).
7. Answers are to be marked on the OMR Answer Sheet, which is provided
separately.
8. Choose the most appropriate answer option anddarken the oval completely,
corresponding to (1), (2), (3) or (4) against the relevant question number.
9. Use only HB pencil to darken the oval for answering.
10. Do not darken more than one oval against any question, as the scanner will
read such marking as wrong answer.
11. If you wish to change any answer, erase completely the one already marked
and darken the fresh oval with an HB pencil.
12. Each question carries equal mark (s). There is Negative Marking and 25%
marks will be deducted for every wrong answer.
xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
16. The right to exclude any question(s) from final evaluation rests with the
testing authority.
The Petitioners claimed that the question paper contained many questions which
were not properly phrased or were outside the syllabus. It was also contended on
behalf of the petitioners that many of the answers as provided in the Answer
Keys were clearly wrong and there were others where the answers were not free
from doubt. Furthermore, several questions had more than one correct answer
whereas the answer key showed only one of them to be correct. The petitioners
contend that questions which were outside the syllabus and questions where the
answers were doubtful or had more than one correct answer have to be deleted
from consideration. Those questions for which the answer key shows an incorrect
answer should be re-evaluated after correcting the answer key. Then, the answer
sheets of all the candidates be re-processed and the corrected list of qualified
candidates be published.
Summarizing the issues and their solutions, the High Court held as under:-
75. In view of the above discussion, the questions would fall into three
categories. The first being those questions where the answers reflected in the
Answer Key are correct. This category would include all those questions which
have not been discussed above (i.e., questions in respect of which there was no
challenge at the hearing) and those questions in respect of which the answers
shown in the Answer Key have been found to be correct by us. The second category
comprises of those questions in respect of which the option shown to be correct
in the Answer Key is incorrect and instead another option as determined above is
correct. The third category of questions covers (1) questions out of syllabus;
(2) questions in respect of which the answer in the Answer Key is debatable; (3)
questions in respect of which there are more than one correct option; (4)
questions in respect of which none of the options is correct; and (5) questions
which are confusing or do not supply complete information for a clear answer.
76. As regards the first category, no change in the Answer Key is required. The
Answer Key in respect of the second category of questions would have to be
corrected and the OMR answer sheets would have to be re-evaluated. Insofar as
the third category is concerned, questions falling in this category would have
to be removed from the purview of the examination. A Summary of all the disputed
questions is given in tabular form below:-
Question Answer as per the Answer Key Correct Answer(s) Out of Syllabus Action
60 (2) (1) No Correct the Answer Key
61 (3) (3), (4) No Remove 69 (3) (3) No No change 71 (3) (3) No No change 80 (2)
none No Remove 84 (4) none No Remove 90 (2) (2) No No change 97 (4) (2) No
Correct the Answer Key
99 (2) none No Remove 100 (2) (1) or (2), No Remove debatable
105 - - Yes Remove 112 - - Yes Remove 140 (4) (3),(4) No Remove 150 - - Yes
Remove 165 (2) (1) No Correct the Answer Key
166 (1) (1) or (3), No Remove debatable
170 (1) (1) No No change 172 (3) (3) No No change 175 (1) (1) No No change 177
(2) (2) No No change 182 (4) (1) or (4) No Remove 187 - - Yes Remove 188 (1) (3)
No Correct the Answer Key
191 (2) (3) No Correct the Answer Key
195 (4) (1) No Correct the Answer Key
197 (4) (1) No Correct the Answer Key
77. From the above table, with respect to the questions discussed above, it is
evident that 12 questions would have to be removed/ deleted from the purview of
the said DJS Exam, 7 questions would require corrections in the Answer Key as
indicated above and 7 questions (alongwith the 174 other questions not disputed
in the course of arguments) require no change in the Answer Key.
78. Now, the point for consideration at this stage is how is this reevaluation
to be done? We must make it clear that the 276 candidates who have been declared
as qualified for the DJS Main Examination (Written) are not before us and,
therefore, it would not be fair to disturb their status as qualified candidates.
At the same time, insofar as the others are concerned, we must also keep in mind
the following twin criteria of qualification in the said DJS exam:-
(1) Minimum qualifying marks in the preliminary examination of 60% for general
and 55% for reserved categories (i.e, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and
Physically Handicapped [Blind/ low vision], [orthopaedic]);
(2) The number of candidates to be admitted to the main examination should not
be more than ten (10) times the total number of vacancies of each category
advertised.
79. Let us first consider the condition with regard to minimum qualifying marks.
When there were 200 questions, the maximum possible marks were 200 on the basis
of one mark for each correct answer. Consequently, the minimum qualifying marks
for general candidates was 120 (60% of 200) and for reserved candidates it was
110 (55% of 200). Because we have directed that 12 questions be removed from the
purview of consideration for the purposes of re-evaluation, the minimum
qualifying marks would also change. It would become 112.8 (60% of 188) for
general candidates and 103.4 (55% of 188) for the reserved categories.
80. We now come to the second condition which stipulates that the number of
candidates to be admitted to the main examination (written) should not be more
than ten times the total number of vacancies of each category advertised. Let us
take the case of general vacancies which were advertised as 23 in number. Ten
times 23 would mean that up to 230 general candidates could qualify. But, as
mentioned above, 235 general candidates have already been declared as qualified
for taking the Main Examination (Written). We are, therefore, faced with a
problem. If we strictly follow this condition then there is no scope for any
other candidates (other than the 235 who have been declared qualified) to
qualify. But, that would be unfair to them as the question paper itself, as we
have seen above, was not free from faults. Hypothetically speaking, a candidate
may have left the 12 questions, which are now to be removed, and, therefore, he
would have scored a zero for those questions. What is worse, he may have
answered all those 12 questions wrongly (in terms of the Answer Key) and,
therefore, he would have received minus (-) 3 marks because of 25% negative
marking. And, all this, for no fault on his part as the 12 questions ought not
to have been there in the question paper. Therefore, it would be unfair to shut
out such candidates on the basis of the second condition.
81. We must harmonize the requirement of the second condition with the
requirement of not disturbing the candidates who have been declared as qualified
as also with the requirement of justice, fairness and equity insofar as the
other candidates are concerned. We feel that this would be possible:
(1) by re-evaluating the OMR answer sheets of all the general category
candidates on the lines summarized in the table set out above;
(2) by selecting the top 230 candidates in order of merit subject to the minimum
qualifying marks of 112.8; and
(3) by adding the names of those candidates, if any, who were earlier declared
as qualified but do not find a place in the top 230 candidates after
re-evaluation.
In this manner, all persons who could legitimately claim to be in the top 230
would be included and all those who were earlier declared as having qualified
would also retain their declared status. Although, the final number of qualified
candidates may exceed the figure of 230, this is the only way, according to us,
to harmonize the rules with the competing claims of the candidates in a just and
fair manner. A similar exercise would also have to be conducted in respect of
each of the reserved categories. The entire exercise be completed by the
respondents within a period of two weeks. Consequently, the Main Examination
(Written) would also have to be re-scheduled and, to give enough time for
preparation, we feel that it should not be earlier than the 26.05.2012.
Long Questions
82. At the beginning of this judgment we had stated that though the objection to
the length of questions had been taken, we were not required to examine that
aspect insofar as this examination was concerned inasmuch as the questions were
equally lengthy for all and did not hurt the relative chances of the candidates.
However, for the future we would like to point out that lengthy questions ought
to be avoided considering the fact that a candidate has only 45 seconds on an
average to read, understand and select the right option. By way of illustration
we quote two questions (Question Nos. 63 and 176) which clearly fall in the
category of lengthy questions:-
63. In a writing containing an acknowledge by 'A' that he will sell his house in
Kolkata to 'B' for a sum of Rs 50,00,000/- or Rs 60,00,000/- and having blank
space with respect to the particulars of the house i.e. the house number, the
street number and the colony not being written, and it not being in dispute that
'A' has a house on a plot of land ad-measuring 300 sq. yards and another house
on a plot of land admeasuring1000 sq. yards at Kolkata, in a suit filed by 'B'
against 'A', 'B' can lead evidence:
(1) To prove that market rate for land in Kolkata is Rs 18,000/- per sq. yard in
the colony where 'A's house was situated; to make good the deficiency in the
writing by linking the price of Rs 18,000/- per sq. yard as only applicable to
the plot ad-measuring 300 sq. yards and the rest being the value of the
building.
(2) To prove that unintentionally the house number got omitted to be written and
that the writing pertained to the 300 sq. yards land and unintentionally the sum
of Rs 50,00,000/- written on the writing got omitted to be scored of.
(3) To prove that the property number was left blank because 'A' told him that
he would be exchanging his house on the 300 sq. yard plot of land with another
house in a similar colony with his brother and later on the house number would
be filled up.
(4) None of the above.
176. 'A' has lent monies to 'B' under a written agreement containing an
arbitration clause. The agreement does not specify the time of repayment. Rather
the money was repayable on demand by 'A'. 'A' after five years of the date when
the loan was made demanded money which was not repaid by 'B'. The parties could
not arrive at a consensus on the appointment of arbitrator also. 'A' filed an
application under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 before
the Chief Justice of the High Court for appointment of an arbitrator. 'B' in
response to the said application contends that the claim of 'A' is stale and
barred by time and thus arbitrator be not appointed. The Chief Justice:
(1) Is bound to appoint the arbitrator leaving the plea of limitation open for
decision in arbitration award.
(2) Is bound to dismiss the application for appointment of arbitrator since the
claim adjudication whereof is sought by arbitration is barred by time.
(3) Is required to make 'B' deposit the money in Court and then appoint the
arbitrator and refer the parties to arbitration.
(4) Is required to require 'A' to furnish security for actual costs of
arbitration to be incurred by 'B' and then appoint the arbitrator and refer the
parties to arbitration.
83. Before concluding this judgment, we would also like to observe that, for the
future, the respondents should take care in framing questions for such
multiple-choice tests. The questions must be clear and provide all the necessary
information leading to the appropriate answer. Questions which have doubtful or
debatable answers should be excluded. As we have seen some of the questions in
this examination require detailed reasoning and consideration which is not
possible in the time frame of 45 seconds. Such questions are best left for an
essay type examination and are not suited to multiple choice tests. In this
light, it would be appropriate to refer to the Supreme Court s decision in
Kanpur University v. Samir Gupta: (1984) 1 SCC 73, wherein the Supreme Court, in
the context of multiple choice objective-type test , inter alia, observed as
under:-
. Fourthly, in a system of multiple choice objectivetype test , care must be
taken to see that questions having an ambiguous import are not set in the
papers. That kind of system of examination involves merely the tick-marking of
the correct answer, it leaves no scope for reasoning or argument.
The answer is yes or no . That is why the questions have to be clear and
unequivocal.
84. We hope that these observations are kept in mind for future examinations
conducted by the respondents.
85. With these observations, the writ petitions are allowed to the extent
indicated above. In the circumstances, the parties are left to bear their own
costs .
(4) Rajesh Kumar and Others Vs. State of Bihar and Others Civil Appeal Nos.
2525-2516 of 2013 decided on 13.03.2013. In this case, the Apex Court was
considering the consequence of an erroneous Model Answer Key . The case in brief
in the opening paragraph reads as under:-
2. Application of an erroneous Model Answer Key for evaluation of answer scripts
of candidates appearing in a competitive examination is bound to lead to
erroneous results and an equally erroneous inter-se merit list of such
candidates. That is precisely what appears to have happened in the present
appeals which arise out of a common judgment delivered by the High Court of
Judicature at Patna whereby the High Court has directed the Bihar Staff
Selection Commission to conduct a fresh examination and re- draw the merit list
on that basis. For those who have already been appointed on the basis of the
earlier examination, a fresh examination has been directed by the High Court
before they are finally ousted from the posts held by them. The appellants who
happen to be the beneficiaries of the erroneous evaluation of the answer scripts
have assailed the order passed by the High Court in these appeals .
Allowing the said appeal, the Apex Court held as under:-
16. The submissions made by Mr. Rao are not without merit. Given the nature of
the defect in the answer key the most natural and logical way of correcting the
evaluation of the scripts was to correct the key and get the answer scripts
re-evaluated on the basis thereof. There was, in the circumstances, no
compelling reason for directing a fresh examination to be held by the Commission
especially when there was no allegation about any malpractice, fraud or corrupt
motives that could possibly vitiate the earlier examination to call for a fresh
attempt by all concerned. The process of re-evaluation of the answer scripts
with reference to the correct key will in addition be less expensive apart from
being quicker. The process would also not give any unfair advantage to anyone of
the candidates on account of the time lag between the examination earlier held
and the one that may have been held pursuant to the direction of the High Court.
Suffice it to say that the re-evaluation was and is a better option, in the
facts and circumstances of the case.
17. That brings us to the submission by Mr. Rao that while re- evaluation is a
good option not only to do justice to those who may have suffered on account of
an erroneous key being applied to the process but also to writ
petitioners-respondents 6 to 18 in the matter of allocating to them their
rightful place in the merit list. Such evaluation need not necessarily result in
the ouster of the appellants should they be found to fall below the cut off mark
in the merit list. Mr. Rao gave two reasons in support of that submission.
Firstly, he contended that the appellants are not responsible for the error
committed by the parties in the matter of evaluation of the answer scripts. The
position may have been different if the appellants were guilty of any fraud,
misrepresentation or malpractice that would have deprived them of any sympathy
from the Court or justified their ouster. Secondly, he contended that the
appellants have served the State efficiently and without any complaint for
nearly seven years now and most of them, if not all, may have become overage for
fresh recruitment within the State or outside the State. They have also lost the
opportunity to appear in the subsequent examination held in the year 2007. Their
ouster from service after their employment on the basis of a properly conducted
competitive examination not itself affected by any malpractice or other
extraneous consideration or misrepresentation will cause hardship to them and
ruin their careers and lives. The experience gained by these appellants over the
years would also, according to Mr. Rao, go waste as the State will not have the
advantage of using valuable human resource which was found useful in the service
of the people of the State of Bihar for a long time. Mr. Rao, therefore, prayed
for a suitable direction that while re-evaluation can determine the inter-se
position of the writ petitioners and the appellants in these appeals, the result
of such re-evaluation may not lead to their ouster from service, if they fell
below the cut off line.
18. There is considerable merit in the submission of Mr. Rao. It goes without
saying that the appellants were innocent parties who have not, in any manner,
contributed to the preparation of the erroneous key or the distorted result.
There is no mention of any fraud or malpractice against the appellants who have
served the State for nearly seven years now. In the circumstances, while
inter-se merit position may be relevant for the appellants, the ouster of the
latter need not be an inevitable and inexorable consequence of such a
re-evaluation. The re-evaluation process may additionally benefit those who have
lost the hope of an appointment on the basis of a wrong key applied for
evaluating the answer scripts. Such of those candidates as may be ultimately
found to be entitled to issue of appointment letters on the basis of their merit
shall benefit by such re- evaluation and shall pick up their appointments on
that basis according to their inter se position on the merit list.
19. In the result, we allow these appeals, set aside the order passed by the
High Court and direct that -
1) answer scripts of candidates appearing in 'A' series of competition
examination held pursuant to advertisement No. 1406 of 2006 shall be got
re-evaluated on the basis of a correct key prepared on the basis of the report
of Dr. (Prof.) CN Sinha and Prof. KSP Singh and the observations made in the
body of this order and a fresh merit list drawn up on that basis.
2) Candidates who figure in the merit list but have not been appointed shall be
offered appointments in their favour. Such candidates would earn their seniority
from the date the appellants were first appointed in accordance with their merit
position but without any back wages or other benefit whatsoever.
3) In case writ petitioners-respondent nos. 6 to 18 also figure in the merit
list after re-evaluation of the answer scripts, their appointments shall relate
back to the date when the appellants were first appointed with continuity of
service to them for purpose of seniority but without any back wages or other
incidental benefits.
4) Such of the appellants as do not make the grade after re- evaluation shall
not be ousted from service, but shall figure at the bottom of the list of
selected candidates based on the first selection in terms of advertisement
No.1406 of 2006 and the second selection held pursuant to advertisement No.1906
of 2006.
5) Needful shall be done by the respondents State and the Staff Selection
Commission expeditiously but not later than three months from the date a copy of
this order is made available to them.
20. Parties are directed to bear their own costs .
13. The Respondents in their reply have submitted that in view of corrective
measures already taken before finalization of final answer key and preparations
of result, the examination has not been faulty/vitiated as alleged. In fact, the
exam was conducted in a free and fair manner. Further, they have submitted that
in the previous Limited Departmental Competitive Examination for promotion to
the grade of SDE (T) was held on 15.07.2007 on all India basis and total 8594
candidates appeared in the examination and 1867 were declared as successful as
per result declared on 08.07.2008. In the instant LDCE total 7471 candidates
appeared in the exam and 2726 were declared successful against 3295 vacancies.
As such the number of candidates declared successful is much higher than that of
2007 exam. Further, according to them, the longtime demand of Union/Associations
was accepted to conduct the exam on OMR pattern (i) to avoid delay in evaluation
process (ii) to reduce inconsistency/unevenness in marking system in descriptive
type question papers. Moreover, the exam was conducted for the first time on
Optical Memory Reader pattern where it is envisaged that due care would be taken
to finalize Answer key and maintain transparency. Negative marking was also
introduced as it is integral part of Optical Memory Reader based Exam to avoid
guess work/speculation. After declaration of provisional result, sufficient time
was also given to candidates to bring to the notice of Recruitment Cell about
any discrepancy/error in the preparation of final result.
14. Further, all the anomalies/discrepancies notices/reported by the all the
candidates irrespective of the fact that whether the question/answer are
correct/incorrect/not attempted. For one question i.e. Question No. 55 two
answers A or D was allowed. Hence, full justice was given to the candidates.
They also denied the statement made by the applicants that many questions were
ambiguous having multiple meaning, many were carrying more than one correct
option and many others were all incorrect. According to them, the final answer
key has been prepared/finalized in consultation with paper setters as well as
expert panel. They have also produced the recommendations of the Expert
Committee which is as under:-
Recommendation of committee on LDCE exam Paper-I
A committee was formed by BSNL Corporate Office, New Delhi vide letter no.
24-3/2012-Rectt. Dated 20.04.2012, comprising of following members-
Shri G K Mishra, Sr. GM (NCES), New Delhi
Shri R C Sharma, DGM (EB-I), BSNL CO
Shri Rajesh Kumar, Addl. GM (NWO CFA),
BSNL CO
Shri Ajai Chandra, DGM (HQ NCES),
New Delhi
The committee was asked to examine /look into the provisional answer key of
paper I-Advanced Technical Paper (General) of the LDCE for promotion to the
grade of SDE (T) under 33% quota held on 04.03.2012 and to finalize the same
with reference to comments/feedback along with the supporting documents received
thereon from the candidates/Unions/Associations.
2. The committee members went through all the documents/representations
submitted by candidates/associations to apprise themselves of their contentions.
After thorough examination of the issue and many rounds of the deliberations,
the committee met to finalize the recommendation there upon on 25.5.2012 &
28.05.2012 in the chamber of Sr. GM, NCES, New Delhi. The Committee has arrived
at its decision on the basis of their experience and knowledge along with
reference to study material of training centres, TEC GR, digital library on BSNL
intranet, circulars of BSNL, manufacture s documentation, Internet etc.,
wherever needed. Efforts have also been made by the committee to consult the
subject matter experts from C-DOT, ALCATEL, ERICSSON, ITI etc. while taking a
final decision in the respective technology.
3. During deliberations the committee came across some questions for which all
the options mentioned in the paper were wrong. For such questions, the committee
is of the opinion that full marks should be awarded to all. Further, some
questions were observed where answer mentioned in the provisional key is
incorrect and correct answer has been indicated against such cases. Provisional
answer key for all other questions is correct except following questions in
respect of which detailed observations and recommendations are as mentioned
below:-
Set A
Q.No. Question Observation Recommendation
4. Maximum how many lines or trunks can be supported by 5 ESS-2000 Switch?
Provisional key answer A is incorrect. Actually it is the capacity of SM 2000
and not of 5ESS-2000 Switch which has many SM 2000. Question has not been framed
correctly and we agree with the facts cited in the representation. As all the
options are wrong, full marks may be given to all.
6. In C-DOT MAX-XL which of the following activity is not part of the Daily
routine recommended by C-DOT? Provisional key answer D is incorrect. We agree
that C-DOT documentation 5.3.3 of Maintenance procedure provides the service
ckts MFC, TOGC, ANNC and TTC should get tested at least once in 24 hours. Matter
has been consulted with C-DOT expert Sh. V.K Kaushik, Programme Manager and in
his opinion traffic analysis (option C has not been recommended by C-DOT under
daily routine. Option C be taken as correct answer.
20. Maximum how many subscribers can be accommodated in a standard rack of DLC
(Local) in EWSD? Provisional key answer D is incorrect because a standard rack
of DLU (Local) can accommodate 2 DLUs of 952 subscribers each. As all the
options are wrong, full marks may be given to all.
21. Peripheral that allows communication between system technician and the 5ESS
-2000
Switch: Provisional key answer A is incorrect. All these peripherals provide one
way or both way communication. Hence option D mentioning all of the above should
be correct answer. Option D be taken as correct answer.
27. In E-10B one fully equipped CSED rack draws: Provisional key answer A is
incorrect. According to E-10B manufacturers documentation 7-0-2 commissioning
manual Vol. =, the current drawn by CSED rack is 13 A. As all the options are
wrong, full marks may be given to all.
32. To know the line parameters, the command in the E-10B is : There is a
typographical error in the command provided as correct answer C suggested in
provisional key. Due to this some officers might have chosen answer D which says
none of the above .
Both option C and D be taken as correct answers and given full marks.
36. What is the recommended Temperature range for EWSD exchange? Provisional key
answer A is factually incorrect, though EWSD can function within these extreme
limits of temperature, but it is not the recommended temperature. Further, none
of the options given is recommended temperature. As all the options are wrong,
full marks may be given to all.
38. How many types of cards (PCBs) are there in OCB-283? Provisional key answer
D does not appear correct. BSNL training centers are teaching that OCB-283 has
maximum 35 types of cards excluding subscriber rack. Technically speaking CSN is
a subscriber interface unit which is not treated as part of OCB-283. Further,
CSN has 2 versions CSN MA and CSN MM, which have different configuration. As all
the options are wrong, full marks may be given to all.
55. In 800 MHz Band GSM, maximum how many carriers are used? Question itself is
wrong, because there is no 800 MHz Band in GSM. As question is wrong, full marks
may be given to all.
59. In BSNL, for implementing DOTSOFT network, which of the following
interconnecting method is used ? Provisional key answer B is incorrect. Normally
star topology is being used in BSNL, which is mentioned under option A Option A
be taken as correct answer.
69. In network of Class B IP addresses, maximum how many Hosts can be connected?
Provisional key answer A is incorrect. Correct answer is 65534 which is not
given in any option. As all the options are wrong, full marks may be given to
all.
84. With regard to Fire Safety measures, which of the following is false?
Provisional key answer D is incorrect. Because, it is true that all the
Exchanges of 2K or above are provided with automatic fire detection. As all the
options are wrong, full marks may be given to all.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
R C Sharma Rajesh Kumar Ajai Chandra
DGM (EB-I), Addl. GM (NOW CFA), DGM(HQ-NCES)
BSNL CO BSNL
Sd/-
G.K.Mishra
Sr.GM(NCES)
15. Further, according to the Respondent-BSNL, the tremendous efforts have been
made by them to conduct such a major exam after a gap of 5 long years by
defending various court cases/litigations successfully. In fact, a recognized
service association Sanchar Nigam Executive Association (India), vide its letter
dated 13.06.2012, conveyed their sincere gratitude to CMD, Dir (EB),GM (Rectt.),
DGM (Rectt.) for their achievement in connection with finalization of answer key
as well as declaration of result stating that it is a milestone achievement .
They have also submitted that the All India Graduate Executive Engineers &
Telecom Officers Association which has represented earlier against the
discrepancies in the Technical Paper-I (General) vide their letter No. CHQ/AIGETOA/347
dated 20.03.2012 themselves vide their letter No. CHQ/AIGETOA/364 dated
19.06.2012 conveyed their heartfelt thanks and satisfaction to the Expert
Committee for examining the anomalies and considering their request in right
earnest and with great positively. Moreover, according to them since all the
corrective measures have been taken by themselves before finalization of the
answer key and declaration of the result, there is no need to conduct the LDCE
afresh. They have also pointed that one of the applicants in the OA Sri
Gaurisankar Bora has submitted to the respondents that his name was included
without his knowledge or consent in the list of applicants and requested this
Tribunal to take judicial notice of it. Their other contention is that instead
preferring these OAs with the malicious intention to stall the entire process of
LDCE and thus depriving the meritorious and successful candidates from their
right of career advancement through promotion, the applicants could have waited
until the finalization of final answer key. Therefore, they are not entitled to
any relief what so ever and there is no need to conduct the LDCE afresh. Rather,
they contended that they should be permitted to grant promotion to all the
meritorious/successful candidates in the LDCE who are waiting for the last
several years for advancement of their career.
16. The Respondents have also relied upon the order of the Madras Bench of this
Tribunal in O.A. No. 851/2010 - Mrs Kumari Vasantharaj-Vs-Union of India & ors
wherein similar discrepancy in framing of questions, answer key and awarding of
marks for each answer of JAO Par-II against 40% quota examination held on
January, 2010 has been considered and held vide order dated 14.09.2011 as
under:-
At the cost of repetition, we would like to reiterate that quality and contents
of the answers will determine the quantum of marks to be awarded to a particular
answer. It is well within the comprehension of the expert examiner to decide the
mark. In the absence of any mala fide or violation of any statutory provision in
conduct of the examination, it can t be said that there is any issue of
adjudicative disposition. In such view of the matter we refrain from granting
the relief claimed by the applicant .
17. The learned counsel for the Respondents Shri Rajnish Prasad has also relied
upon a judgment of the Apex Court in Sanchit Bansal and Another Vs. Joint
Admission Board and Others 2012 (1) SCC 157 wherein it has been held as under:-
24. In Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education v.
Paritosh Bhupeshkumar Sheth [1984 (4) SCC 27] it was observed thus :
"...the Court should be extremely reluctant to substitute its own views as to
what is wise, prudent and proper in relation to academic matters in preference
to those formulated by professional men possessing technical expertise and rich
experience of actual day-to-day working of educational institutions and the
departments controlling them."
25. In All India Council for Technical Education v. Surinder Kumar Dhawan [2009
(11) SCC 726] this court held :
"The courts are neither equipped nor have the academic or technical background
to substitute themselves in place of statutory professional technical bodies and
take decisions in academic matters involving standards and quality of technical
education. If the courts start entertaining petitions from individual
institutions or students to permit courses of their choice, either for their
convenience or to alleviate hardship or to provide better opportunities, or
because they think that one course is equal to another, without realizing the
repercussions on the field of technical education in general, it will lead to
chaos in education and deterioration in standards of education.
The role of statutory expert bodies on education and role of courts are well
defined by a simple rule. If it is a question of educational policy or an issue
involving academic matter, the courts keep their hands off. If any provision of
law or principle of law has to be interpreted, applied or enforced, with
reference to or connected with education, the courts will step in."
(emphasis supplied)
26. This Court also repeatedly held that courts are not concerned with the
practicality or wisdom of the policies but only illegality. In Directorate of
Film Festivals v. Gaurav Ashwin Jain [2007 (4) SCC 737] this court held:
"....Courts do not and cannot act as appellate authorities examining the
correctness, suitability and appropriateness of a policy, nor are courts
advisors to the executive on matters of policy which the executive is entitled
to formulate. The scope of judicial review when examining a policy of the
Government is to check whether it violates the fundamental rights of the
citizens or is opposed to the provisions of the Constitution, or opposed to any
statutory provision or manifestly arbitrary. Courts cannot interfere with policy
either on the ground that it is erroneous or on the ground that a better, fairer
or wiser alternative is available. Legality of the policy, and not the wisdom or
soundness of the policy, is the subject of judicial review..."
(emphasis supplied)
27. Thus, the process of evaluation, the process of ranking and selection of
candidates for admission with reference to their performance, the process of
achieving the objective of selecting candidates who will be better equipped to
suit the specialized courses, are all technical matters in academic field and
courts will not interfere in such processes. Courts will interfere only if they
find all or any of the following :
(i) violation of any enactment, statutory Rules and Regulations;
(ii) mala fides or ulterior motives to assist or enable private gain to someone
or cause prejudice to anyone; or where the procedure adopted is arbitrary and
capricious .
18. We have heard the learned counsel for the Applicants, Shri S.D. Dutta with
Dr. Sumant Bhardwaj, Ms. Anandana Handa for Rajeshekhar Rao, Shri Ahanthem
Haeary in OA 207/2013, Shri Ranjit Singh in OA No. 3683/2012, Shri Amit Anand in
OA No. 3789/2012, Shri Arun Bhardwaj in OA No. 2574/2012, Mrs. Anjani Aiyari in
OA No. 414/2013, Shri Nagaraj Narayan in OA No. 440/2013 and Shri Vikas Jha and
Sunil Kumar Verma in OA 644/2013, learned counsel for official Respondents in
all the cases, Mrs. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Counsel with Shri Rajnish Prasad and Shri
Suderahsan Rajan, learned counsel for private respondents in OA 3789/2012, Shri
Rajeshwar Rao for private respondents in OA No. 207/2013. There is no dispute
between the parties that there were some discrepancies in the questions set in
Advance Technical Paper-1 of the LDCE held on 04.03.2012 for promotion to Sub
Divisional Engineer (Telecom) under 33% quota. But nobody can find fault with
manner in which the examination in question was conducted by the
Respondent-BSNL. They were, in fact, quite transparent in all the aspects of the
procedure in holding the examination. They were also quite positive in their
approach in the matter. They themselves have issued a provisional answer key to
the aforesaid question paper, inviting objections, if any. They have also
responded positively to objections against the answers given in the provisional
key by referring the matter back to paper setters. They have also constituted a
Committee of Experts to go into the various discrepancies pointed out by various
candidates/organizations. The Committee has thoroughly gone through all the
questions and their tentative answer key and came out with their own
recommendations. They did not accept the aforesaid recommendations of the Expert
Committee in toto. So far so good. But they committed the mistake of coming out
with their own compromise answers where there were differences between
recommendations of the Expert Committee and those of the Paper Setters. For
example, in those cases where the Expert Committee recommended that option D
alone was correct, since the paper setters have recommended the other two
options are also correct, the BSNL decided that options A and D are the correct
answers. Again, when the Expert Committee recommended that options C and D are
correct in certain other cases, the BSNL decided that only option D will be
treated as correct. According to the BSNL, their stand is final and accordingly
marks have to be awarded to the candidates.
19. In our considered view, still there are discrepancies and, therefore, still
there is scope for improvement. According to the Expert Committee, for some
questions, 2 options can be taken as correct, for some other questions all
options are wrong and for few other questions, one option is alone correct. But
according to paper setters for some questions (3) three options are correct and
for some other questions (2) two options are correct. In such circumstance, we
shall look forward to the principles laid down by Apex Court which say that
merit shall not be allowed to be the casualty of wrong answer key and the
correct answers shall not be sacrificed. Further, in such circumstances, as far
as possible, the final authority to decide whether a answer is correct or wrong
shall be left to the Expert(s). For some questions, however, if the decision of
the Expert(s) does not solve all the problem, we are bound to take appropriate
decisions. Therefore, there is nothing wrong in accepting the recommendation of
the Expert Committee to award one full mark to all the answers where all options
are wrong. Again, for a set of questions when the Expert Committee says option D
is the only correct answer and for another set of questions when it says, option
A alone is the correct answer, the Respondent-BSNL shall go with the said
recommendations and not to substitute them with its own compromise formula of
awarding full one mark to all who have opted for A , B and D or A and D
respectively. Conversely, the recommendation of the Expert Committee that two
options for another set of questions also cannot be accepted as it would create
further confusion, particularly when there is negative marking. Therefore, all
such questions shall be totally ignored.
20. We, therefore, dispose of all these OAs with the direction to the
Respondent-BSNL to re-evaluate all the answer sheets of all the candidates based
on the aforesaid principles and parameters and prepare a fresh list of qualified
candidates. Since the examination was held on 04.03.2012 and candidates are
awaiting for their promotion for over an year, the Respondent-BSNL shall ensure
that the fresh list of qualified candidates is published as early as possible,
preferably within 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
21. There shall be no order as to costs.
Let a copy of this order be placed in all the case files.
(Shekhar Agarwal) (G. George Paracken)
Member (A) Member (J)
Rakesh