2026:JHHC:9982 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 1922 of 2026 Arti Sinha, aged about-56 years, W/o Om Prakash Sinha, R/o-Cirular Road, Near Deputy Commissioner, Residence, Deoghar Opposite Executive Engineers Office, P.W.D., NH Division, Deoghar, P.O.-Deoghar, P.S.- Deoghar, District-Deoghar, Jharkhand ... … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Secretary, Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Department, Ranchi, Nepal House, PO & PS-Doranda, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. The Jharkhand Public Service Commission (J.P.S.C) through its Chairman, Circular Road, Ranchi through its Chairman, PO & PS-Lalpur, District-Ranchi 4. The Chairman, Jharkhand Public Service Commission (J.P.S.C), Circular Road, Ranchi, PO & PS-Lalpur, District-Ranchi 5. Examination Controller Jharkhand Public Service Commission (J.P.S.C), Circular Road, Ranchi, PO & PS-Lalpur, District-Ranchi ... … Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate Mr. Prince Kumar, Advocate Mr. Jay Prakash, Advocate Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate Ms. Pinky Tiwari, AC to AG Mr. Amit Kr. Verma, Advocate Mr. Rakesh Kumar Roy, AC to GA-III Dr. A. K. Singh, Advocate Mr. Sharon Toppo, Advocate -------- Order No. 4 /Dated: 7th April 2026 In the instant writ application, it is stated that on 03.01.2020, examination was conducted, and on 10.01.2020, answer-key was published on the official website of Jharkhand Public Service Commission and objections were invited from the candidate within a week. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the petitioner submitted objection over 17 questions-answer on 15.01.2020 due to wrong 2026:JHHC:9982 2 question/answer but nothing was done by the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in spite of the fact that the issue involved in this writ application starts with advertisement in 2005 but again in 2023 they have published a fresh result. As such, the prayer of the petitioner is that revisiting with answer sheet of the petitioner may be allowed. 4. Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue of awarding 29 marks in general due to wrong question is pending before the Division Bench of this Court. However, in one of the cases, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that right of publishing modal answer is only with the authority and the Courts should not interfere ordinarily. 5. After perusing paragraph no. 9 of the writ application, it appears that the petitioner had submitted objection over 17 question answer on 15.01.2020 due to wrong questions asked in the said examination by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission and as stated hereinabove the issue of awarding 29 marks to all the candidates is pending before the Division Bench of this Court. As such, at this stage, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner that, in future, if the issue with regard to awarding 29 marks to all the candidates is answered against the respondents in the case pending before the Division Bench in L.P.A No. 296 of 2025; the petitioner may approach the concerned respondent, if at all after getting 29 marks in general she would qualify the exam. 7. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 7th April 2026 Amit Uploaded on 21/04/2026