Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

In a significant development, the Allahabad High Court has raised serious concerns over the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission’s (UPPSC) decision to issue a revised result for the U.P. Provincial Civil Services - Judicial (PCS-J) Examination 2022.

The revised result, issued on August 30, 2024, has led to the cancellation of two previously selected candidates.

In a plea filed by one of the affected candidates, Shravan Pandey, who was represented by Senior Advocate Syed Farman Ahmad Naqvi and Advocate Shashwat Anand, the division bench of Justices Saumitra Dayal Singh and Donadi Ramesh said, 

"Prima facie, issuance of subsequent/fresh result and making of fresh recommendations that too on suo motu basis after the final result had been declared and given effect to, since appointment letters have been issued and candidates have joined and are already serving, it requires serious consideration if it was open to the Commission to adopt such course".

The controversy began when the UPPSC revised the PCS-J 2022 results. The UPPSC issued a revised result on August 30, 2024, canceling the selection of two candidates and recommending two new candidates. This decision was taken on a suo motu basis stating that it was based on the re-tallying of marks and discrepancies found during the process.

However, the candidates who were removed moved the high court challenging this move. Their petitions were submitted shortly after the revised results were published.

The present petitioner emphasized that the number of affected candidates might be significantly larger than the UPPSC has admitted. His counsel contended that a thorough investigation is essential to uncover the full scope of the irregularities, pressing the court to order a CBI inquiry to guarantee transparency and accountability.

The petitioner called for stringent actions against the erring officers of the UPPSC, including lodging an FIR and investigation by the the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the formation of a High-Powered Committee to investigate and supervise the matter.

The petitioner expressed concerns that the UPPSC's decision to release the revised result may be an intentional effort to conceal the scale of the alleged irregularities. The request for a High-Powered Committee to oversee the investigation underscores the petitioner's conviction that only a comprehensive and impartial inquiry can deliver justice to all impacted candidates.

The UPPSC was represented by Senior Counsel G.K. Singh, while the State of Uttar Pradesh was represented by Additional Chief Standing Counsel Kirtika Singh.

The court took note of the fact that the candidates whose results were canceled had already received their appointment letters, joined their positions, and were currently serving. The bench questioned whether the Commission had the legal authority to cancel the results and issue new recommendations after appointments were made.

During the hearing, court sought clarity on the stance of the Uttar Pradesh government in this matter. However, the Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State requested more time to obtain instructions from the Principal Secretary (Appointments) in Lucknow.

Court, therefore, directed the UPPSC to file a detailed affidavit explaining the steps that led to the issuance of the revised results.

The affidavit is expected to cover all actions taken by the Commission, including the notice issued on June 14, 2024, and the subsequent steps that culminated in the declaration of the new results on August 30, 2024. The affidavit will also need to clarify the tallying and re-tallying process of the answer sheets that led to the changes in the final result.

The case is set to be heard again on September 13, 2024.

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