JPSC exam case: High Court to hear the case on March 6
JPSC Commission changed rules many times even after publication of the advertisementUpdated: Feb 26, 2019 08:51 IST
The Jharkhand high court (HC) on Monday fixed March 6 to hear the case challenging the result of sixth combined civil services preliminary examination conducted by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (JPSC).
Controversy gripped the sixth combined civil services examination after the JPSC published results of preliminary test in which a large number of candidates (more than 34,000) qualified for the main examination against a paltry 326 vacancies.
The issue was also raised in the recently concluded budget session of the state assembly with the opposition demanding to put the main exam on hold. The commission had taken the mains examination, which commenced on January 28.
Aggrieved by the result of preliminary test, one Pankaj Kumar Pandey moved the HC challenging the examination process. He also sought injunction on the conduct of main examination. The HC on January 28 had refused to interfere with the main examination but stayed the publication of results. It also issued notice to successful candidates in order to provide them an opportunity to contest the case.
A division bench headed by chief justice Aniruddha Bose found that only one of the successful candidates namely Mritunjay Prasad appeared to contest the case.The bench, on the request of Mritunjay’s lawyer, asked the government to furnish a copy of the case to him .
The petitioner argued that the JPSC had changed the rules on many occasions even after publication of the advertisement in 2015. Citing examples, he said the JPSC had changed the minimum qualifying marks in the preliminary examination.
“Thereafter, it declared as many as 34,634 candidates successful in preliminary test. The number of qualified candidates for main examination was 106 times of the vacancy. This was done in utter violation of the rules as the number of successful candidates can’t exceed 15 times of the vacancy,” the petitioner stated.
He argued that the commission could not change the rules after issuance of the advertisement for recruitment.
First Published: Feb 26, 2019 08:51 IST