The Delhi High Court has directed the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) to respond to a petition challenging the final results of Combined Graduate Level Examination (CGLE), 2024 [Devyanshu Suryavanshi & Ors. Vs Staff Selection Commission & Anr]..CGLE is an examination conducted by the SSC to recruit Group B and C officers to various posts in ministries, departments and organizations of the Government of India.92 candidates, whose name did not appear in the final merit list, have petitioned the High Court accusing the SSC of undertaking a flawed and opaque evaluation process. They have also alleged indiscriminate awarding of bonus marks to all candidates..The vacation bench of Justice Manoj Jain and Justice Renu Bhatnagar on June 25 issued notice to the SSC and listed the matter for consideration on July 28."Let reply be filed within four weeks with advance copy to the opposite side. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter," the Court ordered..The candidates are seeking quashing the results of Session-I of Tier-II exam and a direction to conduct it again. They have also challenged dismissal of similar plea by Central Administrative Tribunal. This is the second round of litigation. In the previous petition, the High Court had prima facie acknowledged the existence of certain discrepancies in one or two questions of the final answer key. .CGLE is conducted in two tiers, Tier I and Tier II. Candidates who clear the Tier I exam qualify for Tier II exam which is again conducted over two sessions. Each correct answer carries three marks with a negative marking of one mark.In the final answer key, candidates reported some discrepancies in few questions. Subsequently, SSC cancelled 19 questions and gave all candidates equal marks regardless of whether they attempted the questions or answered them correctly, the Court was told.This led to an unjust inflation of marks for certain candidates and a corresponding unfair disadvantage to the petitioners, as per the petition.“SSC granted bonus marks indiscriminately, causing unjust enrichment of undeserving candidates and infringing upon the rights of those who answered correctly. Such a practice not only lacks legal justification but also contravenes the standards of competitive examination jurisprudence, warranting judicial interference, it is submitted in the petition,” it was submitted..Further, the answers for four questions were allegedly changed arbitrarily without any concrete reasoning. Bonus marks were awarded even for those questions where the official answer key had already indicated the correct answer.“Firstly, there was no valid reason for declaring the said questions as invalid. Secondly, awarding marks to all candidates—including those who answered the said questions incorrectly—has conferred an undue and unfair advantage upon them, thereby prejudicing the interests of the Petitioners,” the petition said..In particular, the candidates have challenged the application of the process of ‘normalization’ which is alleged to be done without offering any cogent justification or methodology, resulting in an unjust and unconstitutional redistribution of merit.Introduced by SSC in 2019, the ‘normalization’ process was intended to adjust the variation in difficulty levels across different shifts or sets. It sets out a standard formula based on the assumption of uniform ability distribution across shifts.However, according to the petitioners, there were only a limited number of flawed questions that could have been corrected instead of applying the ‘normalization’ process. .Advocates Gauhar Mirza, Aditya Bharat Manubarwala and Tanishka Grover appeared for the candidates.Central Government Standing Counsel Arnima Dwivedi with Advocates Amit Dutta, Harpal Singh and Sainyam Bhardwaj appeared for the SSC.[Read Order]
