The Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission Monday defended the use of Gujarat model onscreen evaluation system to declare the KAS-2016 mains examination results, amid protests by civil services aspirants over alleged "discrepancies" in the results.
JKPSC chairman Latief-uz-Zaman Deva said there was no scope for any malpractice as the best system, having no parallel in the country, was in place for the combined competitive examinations in the state.
"Malpractice is impossible I can guarantee you with authority that compare our system and the reforms which the Commission had introduced, you will find no parallel of the system in rest of the country. This is my challenge," he told reporters here.
Scores of agitated Kashmir Administrative Service (KAS) aspirations are hitting the roads in different parts of the state, including the twin capital cities of Srinagar and Jammu, after JKPSC announced the KAS-2016 mains examination results in a record time of four months on December 4, using the Gujarat model onscreen evaluation for the first time.
The protesters are demanding a probe, claiming mass irregularities in the examination.
Also Read
The KAS 2016 mains examination was conducted from July 2 to August 8 after a delay of nearly one-and-half year.
The result of KAS 2016 mains examination was declared via a notification, shortlisting 963 aspirants out of the total 6,427 candidates who appeared in the examination.
Earlier, the entire KAS 2016 examination process was challenged in high court at different stages, citing discrepancies and irregularities in the recruitment process.
"The Commission is decidedly at the highest pedestal. Levelling allegation is very easy but proving it substantially is difficult. Anybody is welcome to study our system and the reforms we had introduced in the interest of transparency and to maintain highest level of secrecy," Deva, who was flanked by controller examinations Khalid Majeed and secretary Rajesh Sharma, said.
He said the system was internationally recognised, adding "we assure the youngsters that this system is totally error-free".
"Whatever was possible in terms of verifying and
re-verifying has been done," the JKPSC chairman said.
Advising the KAS aspirants to concentrate on their studies to improve their chances next time, he said the digital mode or onscreen evaluation adopted by the Commission left no scope for identification of candidates as answer scripts were given to evaluators randomly.
"We switched to the digital mode to save time as manual evaluation used to take a lot of time in view of large number of candidates," he said.
Deva clarified that most of the candidates were
well-versed with the new system. He said nobody could say that they were not aware as "ignorance of law is no excuse".
He said the Commission has no pre-conceived notion or agenda.
"We followed the law and even re-verified the results before their declaration. There is practically no difference between evaluation through manual process or computers as human mind is involved in both ways," the official said.
In response to a question about alleged discrimination in the selection process, Deva replied, "We have a system based on law, regulations and fair practices, and there is no scope for any type of misdoing".
Controller Examinations Khalid Majeed said the Commission was hoping to get accolades for declaring the results in the shortest possible time which was only possible through the onscreen evaluation system.
"Many of the candidates who could not qualify the examination tried to find one or the other fault with the Commission to put forth their point that everything was not right in the Commission, thus trying to raise unnecessary controversy," he said.
Drawing a comparison between the old and new system, Majeed said the results were prepared within the Commission, a replica of the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC).
"A third party was engaged for scanning but they were not privy to any information because the bar code containing the identity of candidates lies with the chairman," he said, adding 150 evaluators were involved in the process.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
