Disha Sethiya & Anr vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Both the review petitions are arising out of the common order dated 04-07-2017 passed by this court, by which batch of writ petitions challenging the cancellation of Pre Medical Test Examination, 2012 were dismissed.

This court after considering the pleadings and submissions of both the parties held that the decision of the VYAPAM to cancel the result of the petitioners does not warrant any interference in exercise of power of judicial review as the fraud is of facilitation of Optical Mark Recognition (OMR) answer sheets after filling up of blank options to ensure admission to the professional courses.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this court without there being any material held that the case of the applicant was of use of unfair means and mal practices at mass scale.

In paras 10 and 11, this court held that applicant Disha Sethiya had attempted 80 questions, which is apparent from the DAT file generated after the first scanning.. Thereafter, another 119 questions were attempted which is also evident from the second DAT file generated. It was on the basis of second scanning result was prepared and the applicant was admitted to a professional course, which was based upon interpolation in the process of preparation of result and not on their own merit. Once the OMR sheet was scanned which had shown 80 questions were attempted then how another 119 questions could have been attempted after scanning of the original OMR sheet. Such interpolation was made by the applicant and the other candidates with the connivance of the officers and/or officials of the Vyapam so as to make the applicant eligible for admission. The court recorded the finding that the case of the applicant was within ambit of unfair means. The said order was passed after taking into consideration the reply and the record filed by the respondents wherein the specific stand was taken in the following terms:

" The technical persons of the Cyber Cell scrutinized the Hard Disk. During investigation it was found that in the office of VYAPAM these OMR sheets were scanned in the scanner by the VYAPAM officials and after OMR sheet were scrutinized a DAT file was prepared, these DAT files thereafter are run through another Scanner and the scanner identifies the answers which have been marked by encircling the circles in the OMR sheet.

At the relevant point of time the petitioner had encircled 80 answers in the OMR sheet. This factum has been established during the investigation when the S.T.F. seized the hard disk containing the DAT file, therefore, the S.T.F. during the investigation found that the DAT file of the petitioner contained only 80 answers which were encircled by the candidate i.e. the petitioner herself. However, it has also been found during the investigation thereafter on the basis of DAT file a map file is prepared and on the basis of this map file only the final result is declared. Here is the point where the discrepancy has been found and it has been found that there has been an increase in the encircling of circles in the OMR sheet and these circles are increased in such numbers as that to the circles which are contained in the DAT file.

Another relevant part of the reply is reproduced as under :

" It was further submitted that the controller of the examination Nitin Mahindra who is one of the main accused in the matter has admitted that there were many students who were in contact with him and had paid him huge sum of money through various agents so that they may secure higher merit position in the examination. It is submitted that a hard disk was also seized from Nitin Mahindra and in the hard disk an excel sheet was found which contained the name of the petitioner as one of the beneficiary and one of the clients who had paid money to get herself admitted and admitted in the Medical College."

In view of the aforesaid, we find that this court after taking into consideration the detailed submissions and the pleadings has dismissed the writ petition.

It is well settled that the cases are heard and decided only once. To make a departure from this statutory rule, review application must strictly fall within the established parameters. In the light of settled principles of law, in our considered opinion, there is no merit and substance in the review application. The scope of review is well settled. In a review, court has very limited circumscribed by definite limits. Even after elaborate arguments, no error apparent on the face of record could be pointed out.

In view of the aforesaid, review petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Let a copy of the order be placed on record of the connected review petition.