SC refuses to defer Bihar Public Service Commission exam, dismisses plea claiming paper leak
The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to halt the Bihar Public Service Commission's Mains examination scheduled for Friday, dismissing petitions alleging a paper leak during the Preliminary Examinations held on December 13, reported Live Law.
In public service recruitment, the Mains is the second stage of the examination that follows a Preliminary Exam.
A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan dismissed several petitions challenging the 70th Combined Competitive Exams (Preliminary) conducted by the BPSC.
The petitioners claimed that the question papers had been leaked before the exam, citing WhatsApp messages and video clips. One video allegedly showed answers being announced through loudspeakers at a test centre.
Advocates Anjana Prakash and Colin Gonsalves, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the digital evidence warranted a re-test. However, the bench questioned the authenticity of the digital material.
During the hearing, it was noted that the allegations focused on a single centre, Bapu Pariksha Parisar, where a re-examination had already been conducted.
Manmohan pointed out that even the petitioners' claims indicated that the leak occurred after the candidates had entered the exam halls. Prakash contested this, stating that there was no certainty regarding that and a re-test was necessary when the process was under scrutiny, Live Law reported.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing Bihar and the BPSC, argued that the commission used four sets of question papers with jumbled questions to prevent cheating. He said that only two out of 150 questions were found to be verbatim from mock test papers. Gonsalves countered that several questions matched those provided by coaching centres.
The bench, however, found nothing unusual in such overlaps. 'In competitive exams, you find 30% to 40% questions come from the booklet which has thousands of questions,' Manmohan was quoted as having observed.
He added: 'Everyone is playing with the insecurities of each other. Please understand, examiner standard is not that high. It's very unfortunate that no exam is reaching conclusion. We are suspecting everyone of foul play.'
The petitioner, Anand Legal Aid Forum Trust, had first approached the Supreme Court in January seeking cancellation of the exam and the formation of a board to inquire into the conduct of the BPSC. However, the court had directed the petitioner to move the Patna High Court instead.
In March, the High Court dismissed the petitions, saying there was no 'definite evidence of malpractice at all centres'. The court had allowed the BPSC to proceed with the Mains examination.
The current plea before the Supreme Court challenged that High Court order.
The BPSC preliminary exams were conducted across 900 centres and taken by nearly 5 lakh candidates. After protests and allegations of a paper leak, the commission held a re-test on January 4 for 12,012 candidates assigned to 22 centres in Patna. Of these, 5,943 candidates appeared for the exam.
The Bihar Police was criticised for using force against candidates who were demanding cancellation of the December 13 exam. The controversy prompted repeated legal challenges, all of which have now been rejected by the courts.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Will Trump get to pick US Supreme Court justices in his second term?
Legal experts suggest that Donald Trump may have the opportunity to appoint additional Supreme Court justices during a potential second term, potentially reshaping the court's direction for decades. Justices Thomas, Alito, and Roberts may face pressure to retire, allowing Trump to install younger, like-minded individuals. Experts have said Trump might appoint loyalist justice. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Can Trump overhaul judiciary? Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Can Trump pick judges? Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Trump may seek loyalty over ideology During his first term in office, President Donald Trump appointed 226 federal court judges, including three US Supreme Court justices. Trump successfully installed judges who promoted his political agenda, including overturning the landmark ruling from 1973 that declared the Constitution guaranteed the right to abortion, Roe v. something unusual appears to be unfolding in his second term. Rather than reinforcing Trump-era policies, federal judges — even those appointed by Trump himself — are now halting key parts of the president's second-term initiatives. So, a question that keeps popping up on everyone's mind is that- Will Donald Trump appoint Supreme Court judges in the US?Trump may have the opportunity to appoint new Supreme Court justices during his second term in office, legal experts told Newsweek. During his first term in office, Trump appointed three justices to the US Supreme Court, thus significantly influencing the judiciary system. Trump may have another chance to nominate a justice in the coming years- —an appointment that could shape the Court's direction for decades. Such a move would likely have profound effects on public policy, particularly in areas like abortion, LGBTQ+ rights, immigration, and executive Justices Clarence Thomas (76), Samuel Alito (75), and Chief Justice John Roberts (70) are already facing calls from some on the right to consider retirement in the coming years. With Republicans currently holding control of the presidency and a 53-seat majority in the Senate, they are in a strong position to confirm new Supreme Court justices without Democratic argue that Republicans should take a lesson from Democrats, who have previously faced setbacks when their justices chose not to retire during favorable political Urman, a law professor at Northeastern University, told Newsweek that while it's impossible to predict exactly when a justice might step down, Justices Alito and Thomas are the most likely candidates for retirement—primarily to allow a like-minded successor to be appointed. However, he noted that this isn't a certainty, as both justices are now part of the majority after spending years as dissenting voices on the Court, a position they deeply from the right may not be convincing to the justices, he said."Judges and especially Justices are very independent, and I don't think they will be too influenced by the pressure campaign," he said. "It's ultimately a very personal decision and the Ginsburg example is important but she was older and faced more health issues than the current justices."None of the current justices on the court have publicly said they plan to retire anytime federal prosecutor Gene Rossi told Newsweek Thomas could wait until after the 2026 midterms to avoid giving Democrats a motivating issue ahead of the elections."However, if that happens, President Trump will pick a very young and conservative nominee because in his mind, he got burned with Justice Barrett," he said. "And he wants to put his further imprint on the tenor of the High Court."Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told Newsweek: "It's likely Trump appoints at least one Supreme Court Justice, and maybe two. The odds increase over his four-year term, especially with Justices Thomas and Alito being in their mid-70s.""Trump's Cabinet and officer appointees during his second term have been largely loyalists without the experience or independent streaks that frustrated him during his first term. His Supreme Court appointment(s) will likely reflect those same values, especially given the importance of the judiciary in standing in the way of his executive orders."Stephen Wermiel, a constitutional law professor at American University, told Newsweek, "It's uncertain whether Trump will have another Supreme Court vacancy. But there's a good chance conservatives will begin urging Roberts, Thomas, and Alito to retire after this term so Trump could install younger, like-minded justices.'Legal analysts believe Trump may prioritize personal loyalty over ideological alignment when choosing future Supreme Court McQuade, a former federal prosecutor, told Newsweek that frustration with decisions made by Justices Barrett and Roberts may drive Trump to look for candidates who are not only conservative but personally loyal to him."Trump could seek justices who won't break from him on major rulings," McQuade said. "That could have a major impact on upcoming cases dealing with birthright citizenship, transgender healthcare, and the limits of executive power."Justice Amy Coney Barrett has occasionally sided against Trump's positions, including a ruling against deporting alleged gang members under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. Her independent stance has drawn criticism from Trump-aligned analyst Urman agreed that loyalty may guide Trump's future selections, noting that he 'appears to value loyalty above all else in his nominees.' Any new appointments, Urman added, would likely align more closely with the judicial philosophies of Justices Thomas or Alito than Barrett.
NDTV
an hour ago
- NDTV
Hong Kong Appoints New Zealand Judge To Top Court
Quick Read Summary is AI generated, newsroom reviewed. A New Zealand judge has been appointed to Hong Kong's top court amid overseas jurist exodus. William Young, 73, joins five other overseas non-permanent justices from the UK and Australia. Hong Kong invites overseas judges to its Court of Final Appeal to uphold common law jurisdiction. Hong Kong: A New Zealand judge has been appointed as a justice of Hong Kong's top court, after a years-long exodus of overseas jurists following Beijing's imposition of a sweeping security law on the finance hub. Hong Kong's lawmakers on Wednesday approved the appointment of William Young, 73, to join five other overseas non-permanent justices from the UK and Australia. Hong Kong is a common law jurisdiction separate from mainland China and invites overseas judges to hear cases at its Court of Final Appeal. Their presence has been seen as a bellwether for the rule of law since the former British colony was handed back to China in 1997. Beijing passed a national security law on Hong Kong in 2020, following huge and often violent pro-democracy protests in the Chinese city the year before. Since then, several overseas judges have quit the Court of Final Appeal without finishing their terms, while others have not renewed their appointments. The lineup of overseas judges has gone from 15 at its peak down to five, not including Mr Young. The newly appointed justice, who retired from his role as a New Zealand Supreme Court judge in April 2022, is expected to start in Hong Kong this month. Hong Kong leader John Lee accepted a recommendation to appoint Mr Young in May and praised him as "a judge of eminent standing and reputation". Cases at the top court in Hong Kong are typically heard by a panel of four local judges and a fifth ad hoc member, who may be a foreign judge. In January, Hong Kong's chief justice said recruiting suitable overseas judges "may be less straightforward than it once was", given geopolitical headwinds. The government has defended the security law as necessary to restore order after the 2019 protests and said the city remains a well-respected legal hub.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Stop cattle slaughter for Bakrid, says Vishwa Prani Kalyana Mandali
Sri Dayananda Swami of the Vishwa Prani Kalyana Mandali has appealed to the Union and State governments to stop cattle slaughter during Bakrid festival across Karnataka. In a letter to the governments, he demanded that cattle slaughter and animal sacrifice be banned on Bakrid falling on Saturday (June 7 this year) and subsequent days as per provisions of the Prevention of Slaughter and Preservation of Cattle Act 2020 and the Prevention of Animal Sacrifices Act 1959, Rules 1963 and Amendment Act 1975. He has attached copies of some Supreme Court and High Court orders in support of his demand. Members of the mandali, including Uttam Chand Jajed, Suresh Runawal, Ashok Nagore, Sukhveer Jain, and others have signed the letter.
