JPSC Preliminary Exam Result: Revised 7th to 10th JPSC Preliminary Exam Result will be released soon. The names of 1044 additional candidates will be included in the revised results. On Tuesday, this information was given to the Supreme Court by the JPSC and permission was sought to release the revised results. On this, the court of Chief Justice Dr. Ravi Ranjan and Judge Sujit Narayan Prasad said that the JPSC had already admitted the error in this case. Once a mistake has been made, it must be corrected and the revised result issued. This does not require permission from the court. Considering the basis of JPSC’s affidavit, the court has carried out all of the petitions filed regarding the revised result.
Let us inform that JPSC had made reservations in the previously released PT result. An appeal against this has been submitted to the Supreme Court. The court then asked JPSC and the government to clarify their position on reservation. They were asked to indicate whether the advantage of reservation was given in the preliminary investigation or not. How many seats were there by category in the seventh JPSC. How many candidates for the reserved category and how many candidates for the general category have been selected.
On February 11, JPSC filed an affidavit admitting an error had been made in releasing the results of the preliminary investigation. It has been reserved. On January 25, JPSC had accepted the error in the PT result by filing an affidavit and said the revised result would be released in three weeks. The commission had also postponed the January 28 main inquiry.
Kumar Sanyam had challenged the discrepancy in the preliminary results of JPSC VII to X. He had said in the petition that reservations were made in the seventh JPSC preliminary inquiry, which is incorrect. The condition of booking for the exam was not mentioned in the advertisement published for the exam. The government has not made a pre-trial reservation policy, according to which the advantage of pre-trial reservation can be given. Claiming to be reserved in the preliminary investigation, he said there were 114 seats in the general category. According to the rules, 15 times the results must be released. In such a situation, 1710 candidates of the general category must be selected. But only 768 candidates were selected. This clearly shows that there is a caveat in the PT result.
The Appellant also referred in his application to several orders of the Divisional Bank of the High Court in the year 2012. The Petitioner had said that in the case of Ghulam Sadiq, on 16 June 2021, the Divisional Bank of the High Court had said in its decision that according to the government of Jharkhand, there is a policy of making reservations about JPSC’s preliminary investigation. At the same time, in the year 2015, in the case of Laxman Toppo, a division bench of the Supreme Court had said that the policy of the government of Jharkhand is not to hold any reservations about the preliminary investigation. Court cannot order reservation. The petition stated that there were 114 seats in the general category. Fifteen times (1710) results were supposed to be released, but only 768 were selected. This shows that a reservation has been made in the preliminary investigation.