After a series of protests failed to derail the UPSC civil services preliminary examination, it was the turn of the Supreme Court on Saturday to deny the protesting candidates’ final attempt to defer the examination by two months.
The court rejected the plea of a candidate Angesh Kumar, who wanted the examination to be postponed by two months.
In the meantime, he expected the Government to conduct an overall evaluation on the pattern of the Civil Services Aptitude Test (CSAT), rather than indulge in any “knee-jerk” reaction such as the one taken a week ago when the Government announced that English comprehension marks will not be counted in CSAT score.
“The defect that you point out has already been remedied. There are no marks for English comprehension. What is the good reason to postpone the examIJ” the Bench of Justices JS Khehar and Arun Mishra asked lawyers representing the petitioner.
Sitting on a Saturday, which is otherwise a holiday, the Bench gave a patient hearing to the petitioner. Any order so late in the day would have affected nine lakh candidates, who applied for the test on May 18 this year.
The Bench made the inference, “Nine lakh students are ready to give the examination. Only one student is not ready. They must have attended coaching classes as it is the same syllabus. If syllabus was changed we could have understood.”
The petitioner, led by advocate Ravindra S Garia, argued that lakhs of candidates stood behind the petitioner in hope that the court will pass an order. For most candidates, it will be the final attempt to appear in CSAT, he submitted.
As much time was lost in staging agitation and in seeking a favourable response from the Government, the petitioner requested if a notice could be sent to Centre without disturbing the exam. The petition annexed reports by two expert Committees which suggested amendments to CSAT format noting the disadvantage faced by rural-based students. The petitioner contended that students from non-Science background too were at a loss.
“The problem is you don’t want merit to be assessed. You want it assessed your way,” the Bench said. The court said these are policy decisions by Government where expert bodies recommend to Government which in turn receives suggestions from various departments before taking a decision. “Even in appointment of judges, there is debate and debate. Finally somebody has to decide and it has to be binding,” the Bench added.
On the issue of discrimination, the Bench felt “studious” students have always opted for science, medicine and engineering stream and will perform better. The court asked the petitioner to take heart and encouraged him to file a better petition even as it dismissed the present one.