The Maharashtra Public Service Commission (MPSC) has been taken to task by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT) over disregarding its own rules during the announcement of final results.
Despite the advertisement clearly outlining the process of declaring results, the MPSC has been blamed for failing to adhere to the stipulated procedures, notably omitting the ‘preference order’ element from the list of recommended candidates.
Moreover, the MPSC secretary turned a blind eye to complaints by students, prompting aggrieved candidates to escalate the matter to the MAT. However, the MPSC could not provide a satisfactory explanation to the tribunal. In response, the MAT pulled up the MPSC, emphasising the importance of adhering to rules and ordered the exam body to release revised results. Concerns had been raised after the MPSC declared results for the ongoing recruitment process for the Joint Main Examination Group
B 2023, which includes positions such as Deputy Inspector of Police, Sub Registrar – Stamp Inspector, State Tax Inspector, and Assistant Cell Officer Group B 2023.
However, the MPSC directly announced the results without adhering to the notification,
which specified merit list, order of preference, opting out of provisional selection list, and subsequent final recommendation list would be followed for these positions. This departure left approximately 300 candidates apprehensive about their job prospects. Pune Times Mirror has been constantly highlighting the concerns raised by MPSC aspirants. Meanwhile, the MPSC secretary had claimed that students had misunderstood the situation and the result of the recruitment process was announced after following all the rules. However, this explanation did not suffice and the students directly approached MAT.
The MPSC secretary, under compulsion, addressed the issue in the tribunal. However, his responses to the tribunal’s inquiries were deemed unsatisfactory. It came to light that only recommendation letters from the MPSC had been forwarded to the government, deviating from established protocols.
The secretary informed the MAT that out of 96 candidates, 14 were duplicated in the Sub-Registrar and Assistant Cell Officer list, while two were repeated in the Sub-Registrar, Assistant Cell Officer, and State Tax Inspector lists. Moreover, 80 candidates were repeated in the Sales Tax Inspector and Assistant Cell Officer lists. Consequently, the total recommended candidates for the Assistant Cell Officer post, yet to be announced by the MPSC, reached 164, with 96 candidates being duplicates, constituting over 60 percent of the total qualified list for recommendation.
In compliance with MAT’s directive, the MPSC must revise lists until each candidate receives only one post. Selected candidates for Sub-Registrar and State Tax Inspector positions by May 24 will receive letters to choose their preferred post. Similarly, those selected for the Assistant Cell Officer position by May 30 will receive similar correspondence from the commission. By June 4, the MPSC must publish revised lists and submit recommendations to the government. Should the commission engage in any unlawful practices again, candidates will have the opportunity to appeal by June 15.
“The MPSC was alerted to the errors in the adjudication process. Still, students bore the brunt of the secretary’s arrogance. There appears to be a trend of selectively bending rules framed by MPSC for convenience. The behaviour exhibited by these officers tarnishes MPSC’s reputation. The MPSC president should intervene and provide proper guidance to the secretary and joint secretary,” said Azam Shaikh, a Right to Information (RTI) activist.
Students demand removal of MPSC secretary
The MPSC secretary is facing criticism for recurrent errors in exam results and a perceived lack of accountability. Despite being alerted to these errors, the secretary did not rectify them or offer
satisfactory explanations. This approach resulted in unqualified candidates passing exams. The MPSC holds significance in aiding economically disadvantaged students’ aspirations. However, irresponsible officials threaten these dreams. In response, students express have called for the removal of the secretary.
