Jharkhand Government's Order Cancelling JPSC, JSSC Exams Stayed By High Court

The Jharkhand government decided to cancel the 22 recruitment examinations based on findings of CID and SIT investigations into alleged irregularities in various competitive examinations.

Advertisement
Read Time: 2 mins

The Jharkhand High Court has stayed the state government's order cancelling the 11th and 13th Jharkhand Public Service Commission (JPSC) examinations and appointments, providing relief to newly appointed officers who had challenged the decision.

The court passed the order while hearing various petitions filed by the newly appointed officers against the government's decision.

This development follows after the Chief Minister Hemant Soren-led Jharkhand government released a list of 44 recruitment examinations conducted by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (JPSC) and Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission (JSSC) that were cancelled following irregularities, amid student protests over the issue.

The government's orders came after a 25-day students' agitation over alleged irregularities in the recruitment exams. It also announced the formation of a committee to examine reforms in the JPSC and JSSC examination system.

The cancelled examinations include recruitment tests for drug inspectors, assistant professors, deputy collectors, dental doctors, assistant engineers, civil judges, additional public prosecutors and forest range officers, among others.

Advertisement

The list also includes examinations for lecturers in government polytechnics, senior scientific officers, assistant conservators of forests and various administrative and technical posts.

The candidates' primary argument was that the government unilaterally cancelled the examinations and subsequent appointments without giving them an opportunity to present their case.

Advertisement

A large number of these candidates had already joined government service following their selection, and the government's decision has directly jeopardised their employment.

The petitioners also invoked the principles of natural justice in their defence. They argued that while action should be taken against any candidate found to have played a dubious role during the investigation, it would be unjust to remove all successful candidates from their jobs without an individual inquiry or hearing.


Topics mentioned in this article