Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

In a landmark judgment, the Allahabad High Court has constituted a commission headed by Justice Govind Mathur, former Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court, to overhaul the evaluation procedures of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission's (UPPSC) judicial services examination- 2022.

The direction follows the court's observations of significant inconsistencies and flaws in the conduct and evaluation of the UPPCS(J)-2022 examination.

A division bench comprising Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Donadi Ramesh noted deficiencies such as a lack of standardized marking scales, overreliance on theoretical assessments over analytical reasoning, and inconsistent evaluation practices. These issues, it stated, undermine the credibility of the selection process and jeopardize public confidence in the Commission's integrity.

The newly formed commission is tasked with recommending ways to make the evaluation process more reliable, transparent, and equitable. It will also propose mechanisms to ensure adherence to prescribed evaluation practices, address procedural deviations, and provide explanations for the UPPSC’s inability to self-correct prior to result declarations.

The commission's report is expected by May 31, 2025, and the UPPSC has been directed to extend full logistical support for its functioning.

The order came in a petition filed by Shravan Pandey, represented by Senior Advocate Syed Farman Ahmad Naqvi, along with Advocate Shashwat Anand, alleged that his answer booklet had been swapped with another candidate’s during evaluation. The petitioner discovered this anomaly after invoking his rights under the RTI Act and subsequently inspecting his answer sheets. Following judicial orders, UPPSC admitted its error, stating that the mishandling of codes during the anonymization process led to mismatched evaluations.

Despite initiating corrective measures, such as inviting all 3,019 candidates to inspect their answer sheets and issuing a revised merit list, the UPPSC's unilateral actions, including altering interview eligibility, attracted sharp criticism from the court.

The High Court emphasized the need for greater accountability, ordering the UPPSC to file a detailed affidavit outlining the corrections made and their implications for the merit list.

Court called the errors, which led to the mismanagement of answer sheets and discrepancies in the evaluation process, a “blunderous mistake.”

Court further emphasized that candidates affected by the mistake must have their grievances addressed promptly, especially as selected candidates have already begun training.

The matter is scheduled to be listed among the top ten cases in the first week of July 2025.

Case Title: Shravan Pandey vs. State Of Up And 2 Others