RANCHI: The legal battle launched by affected candidates against the Jharkhand government’s decision to cancel 22 recruitment examinations witnessed another dramatic twist as the High Court stayed the state government’s order on Thursday.
The government’s cancellation orders had come following a 25-day sustained agitation by students over alleged irregularities in the recruitment exams.
The Jharkhand government had stated that the cancellations followed “complaints regarding irregularities in ongoing examinations conducted by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (JPSC) and executed through TDPL, and based on facts brought before the government during the CID investigation”.
The government also announced the formation of a high-level committee to examine and recommend reforms in the JPSC and JSSC examination systems.
The cancelled examinations included recruitment tests for drug inspectors, assistant professors, deputy collectors, dental doctors, assistant engineers, civil judges, additional public prosecutors, and forest range officers, among others. The list also covered examinations for lecturers in government polytechnics, senior scientific officers, assistant conservators of forests, and various other administrative and technical posts.
A batch of four petitions had been filed challenging the state government’s cancellation order.
The petitioners included successful candidates from the 11th-13th JPSC Combined Civil Services Examination, JSSC-CGL, and the Food Safety Officer examination. The petitions were filed by successful candidates, including Avadhesh Kumar, Deepmala, Sonam Kumari, and Saurabh Singh, among others. The candidates’ primary argument was that the government unilaterally cancelled the examinations and subsequent appointments without providing them an opportunity to present their side.
A large number of these candidates had already joined government service following their selection, and the government’s abrupt decision had directly jeopardised their employment.
The petitioners also invoked the principles of natural justice in their defense. They argued that while action should be taken against any candidate found to have played a dubious role during the ongoing investigation, it would be utterly unjust to remove all successful candidates from their jobs without an individual inquiry or fair hearing.
They maintained that they had appeared for the examinations strictly in accordance with the prescribed procedures, secured positions on the merit lists, and were subsequently appointed to government posts.
In the JSSC-CGL case, some petitioners also argued that the examination results were declared in compliance with earlier High Court orders, raising serious questions over the legality of the government’s subsequent decision to scrap the entire examination.
For more details: Navamalayalam.com