SUJAN K.A. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are the unsuccessful original applicants in O.A. (EKM).No.756 of 2019 and O.A.(EKM).No.871 of 2019 filed before the Kerala Administrative Tribunal. The original applications were filed with the prayer to set aside the objective type (OMR) examination conducted by the Public Service Commission on 22.1.2019 to the post of Assistant Public Prosecutor, Grade-II. The reasons urged in support of the prayer were that in the examination, 80 marks were provided for questions covering legal topics, such as Indian Penal Code , Criminal Procedure Code , Indian Evidence Act etc. and 20 marks for general knowledge, English and Kerala Renaissance. It was alleged that out of the 80 marks on legal topics, majority of the questions were verbatim reproduction of questions from a guide named 'Universal Multiple Choice Questions for Judicial Service Examination, 11 th Edition by Vinay Kumar Gupta', published by the Universal Publishers. It was contended that in order to facilitate the malpractice, the PSC had confined its questions to only 4 out of the 23 legal topics which had been listed as probable topics from which questions would be asked. It is also alleged that some of the candidates had got prior information that questions would be asked from that particular guide and thereby had got undue advantage in the examination. In support of the challenge, relevant pages of the guide were produced.

(2.) Public Service Commission refuted the allegations and stated that the question papers of all the examinations conducted by the Commission are prepared by experts in the concerned subjects. The Commission never directs the question setters to follow any reference book for the preparation of the question papers. After preparation of the question papers, the experts send it directly to the Commission in sealed covers. One among the question papers thus received from different question setters is selected by taking lots and is sent to the security press for printing. Thereupon, the question papers are printed and packed in sealed covers by the press and are opened only inside the examination hall, for distributing to the candidates. It is hence submitted that there was no possibility of leakage of question papers or of any particular question paper being used for an examination. It is the specific contention of the PSC that none of the officers/staff of the Commission dealing with question papers get to open the sealed cover containing the question papers at any point of time, to check its contents, as it will adversely effect the secrecy of the entire process. It was submitted that the allegations regarding majority of the questions being from a particular guide and leakage of questions were subjected to a detailed enquiry by the Vigilance Wing of the Commission headed by a Superintendent of Police. The report of enquiry was examined by the Examination Monitoring Committee of the Commission, with reference to the numerous books and guides dealing with the subjects on which questions were asked. After such examination, the committee came to the conclusion that the questions were based on the Bare Acts and not on the application level. Being based on Bare Acts, the questions would have been included in different publications/books relating to law and hence the allegation regarding copying of questions was without substance.

(3.) In its counter affidavit, the PSC has displayed a comparative chart of the questions included in its question paper and the questions as published by four different law publications. A perusal of the comparative chart revealed that in the question paper, there were more number of questions printed in the guides of other publishers than the questions printed in the Universal Publications guide. With respect to the confinement of questions to four topics, the Commission stated that in the notification inviting applications itself, it had been made clear that there was no guarantee that the question paper will cover all the topics.