Recruitment matters
ishwar
(Querist) 13 October 2013
This query is : Resolved
Dear Sir,
In 2011 december Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission released a notification for Group - 1 services exam. I am an aspirant of group - 1 services of Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission(APPSC). In May - 2011, APPSC conducted preliminary exmination (objective in nature) for group-1 services exam in which a total of 16000 members filtered for Mains exam out of 1,80,000 of total aspirants appeared for the exam.
After preliminary filteration some candidates went to APAT saying that there are 13 wrong answers in the preliminary examination key published by Appsc. When it went to APPSC notice, it appointed an expert commitee to revise the key objections filed by those aspirants. After careful analysis Expert commitee advised appsc to correct 7 answers out of 13 mentioned by those aspirants. Appsc accepted the suggestions made by expert commitee and altered the Mains selection list(Preliminary cleared aspirants list) as per the new key.
With this revised new list AP Public service commission went ahead and conducted Mains (Descripttive) exam for those 16000(Approximately) and shortlisted 606 candidates for interview. In February and March 2013 APPSC conducted interviews for those 606 candidates and ready to release the final merit list for the 314 posts.
In the mean time the aspirants who were filed the petition earlier went to Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal ( APAT ) and asked it to direct APPSC to revise the remaining 6 bits (13 - 7 mentioned above) also and stop the process. But APAT refused to direct Appsc to stop the process. Instead APAT directed APPSC to continue the selection process but should not release final merit list until the final judgement.
After some hearings APAT ordered APPSC to appoint another expert commitee to look into the 6bits. After indepth anlysis The expert commitee advised Appsc to remove 2 bits to avoid ambiguity as they have more than one correct answers and no objections for 4bits.
But the aspirants went to High court saying that they cant believe the expert commitee report as it was appointed by APPSC itself. Then highcourt ordered UPSC to look into this matter and submit its report within one month.
As they questioned the genunity of Appsc and its expert commitee and delaying the selection process, Appsc filed Special Leave Petition in Supreme Court to vacate the stay order given by AP High Court.
After careful analysis The Honerable Supreme court Bench comprised of Honerable Justices Mr. Chalameswar Sir and Mr. Gokale Sir announced the judgement by ordering APPSC to delete all the six bits which are ambigious and reprepare the mains selection list and reconduct the entire mains exam once again to all 16000aspirants.
But the fact is, even after repreparing the list after deleting the 6 bits also....99% of the candidates who wrote earlier will be also in the new list and have to write Mains exam (Total of 6 discripttive papers) once again.
[As I am one of the 606 candidates who sucussfully cleared Preliminary - Mains - Interview stages.....i know how hard it is to prepare for these stages. If remains conducted all of us loose almost 2 years of time which was dedicated for this preparation and confidence also. In the entire process we did not have neither a role nor did a mistake. Why because the entire selection process is under the control of APPSC. But still we were the loosers and has to write the exam once again and nothing will happen to those professor who prepared the wrong key and Appsc officials who conducted the exams based on such a key]
As per some legal experts APPSC did some blunders and missed some key points in filing its counter.
They are......
1). Expert comittee suggested only 2 bits out of 6 are ambigious and can be deleated. If Appsc deletes those only 3 members out of 16000 will be effected.
2). If it deletes all the 6 bits then a total of 200-300 candidates will be effected out of 16000 candidates who already wrote mains exam.
3). Apart from these technicalities, the present AP law and order situation does not permit any state level exam conduction (AP TET, DSC, ALL University entrance Tests...etc were cancelled already) because of ANDHRA - Telamgana Bifurcation issue. So APPSC cannot conduct Re Mains to all the candidates.
respected Sirs,
My questions are....
1). Can we file a review petition again in SC by taking all this issues to Honerable Justice's Mr. Chalameswar sir and Mr. Gokale sirs....
2). is there any chance to accept this review petition on the above said grounds.....
3). If accepted, in which way can we argue to avoid remains as there is no single mistake on our part....
4). If possible please guess the possible out come judgement ......
Thank you sirs...please give your valuable advice as early as possible....
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 13 October 2013
The only course left to those who wrote for mains and were interviewed is to approach APEX court for another direction caring their hardship for no fault of their own.The point needs equitable consideration.
ishwar
(Querist) 13 October 2013
Dear sir,
Thank you for your kind reply sir.Actually AP public service commission is planning to file a review petition in Supreme court immediately after dussera vacations. if SC not admitted the review petition what should we do sir?....
(i heard that SC does not alter its decision once pronounced until unless strong New evidences produced...but the above points are old points. But APPSC failed to produce them before honble bench. There are no new evidences sir...)
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 13 October 2013
Those who wrote for mains and were interviewed were not party at any stage,not even before the Supreme court, APPSC was required to raise this point right from Tribunal stage,or from writ stage,but it failed.The order of Supreme court has come without hearing to those who would be actual sufferers which is not the principle of justice and hence they have right to file an independant case before supreme court making
all original petitioners at High Court and APPSC as respondent to their petition.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 13 October 2013
long narrative.
already there are 2/3 court judgement.
none can advise without seeing papers.
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 13 October 2013
consult lawyer personally.
ishwar
(Querist) 13 October 2013
Thank you very much for your kind replies sirs...special thanks to prabhakar sir...i will take these suggestions to my fellow interview candidates...
Dear Sudhir sir this is the judgement given by SC on 07/10/2013 for the above mentioned case....
please kindly refer this and suggest me accordingly.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.9140 OF 2013
(Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.25157 of 2013)
Andhra Pradesh Public Service
.. Appellant(s)
Commission
Versus
K. Prasad & Anr.
.. Respondent(s)
WITH CA.No.9141/2013 @
SLP(C) NO. 25209 of 2013
WITH CA.Nos.9142-9143/2013 @SLP(C) NO. 29716-29717 of 2013
O R D E R
Leave granted.
(1)Heard Mr. Shyam Divan learned senior counsel
for the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission and
learned counsel for original petitioners as well as the
counsel for the intervenors.
(2)The original petitioners raised the dispute
regarding examination conducted by the appellant Andhra
Pradesh Public Service Commission for selection for the
Grade-I Services in Andhra Pradesh. The examination was
to be conducted in two parts, first the preliminary
examination which was to be for 150 marks. The
preliminary examination was of objective type wherein
four choices were given and the candidates were to chose
one of them and answer the same in OMR Sheet. Those who
qualified in the first examination i.e. the preliminary
examination were to be eligible to appear in the main
examination.
..2/-
:2:
(3) After considering the reports of a couple of
committees the High Court arrived at a decision wherein
according to it the Andhra Pradesh Public Service
Commission will have to revise the selection process in
accordance with the answer arrived at by the expert
committee, and issue proper orders. The High Court
directed the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission to
re-examine the whole issue and consult U.P.S.C..
(4)Being aggrieved, the Andhra Pradesh Public
Service Commission filed this appeal. Even after
whatever screening has been done earlier, we find the
following six questions and there answers to be
problematic. It is the specific case of the original
petitioners that the key answers given by APPSC for six
questions at Serial Nos.4, 43, 61, 62, 107 and 130 in "D"
series are confusing. These questions did not have one
clear answer and that being so it will be unfair to the
candidates that the preliminary examination should be
decided by including these six questions.
By our order
passed on the last date we asked Mr. Diwan to take
instructions as to whether these problematic questions
could be deleted.
...3/-
:3:
(5)Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that these questions cannot be retained .
That being so, the marks secured have to be recounted
from the answer books written by all the candidates on
the basis of 144 questions after deleting these six
questions and their answers. Those who succeed after
revaluation will be eligible for the main examination
and the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission will
hold the main examination de novo thereafter.
On the
basis of these 144 questions some new candidates may
succeed or some candidates may fail. It will be the new
list of candidates passing the examination of 144 marks
who will take second main examination.
(6)
The appeals are allowed accordingly.
......................J.
[H.L. GOKHALE ]
......................
[J. CHELAMESWAR]
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 16 October 2013
No more to add after reading the replies of the experts.
