The candidate, Kalpana, discovered the reason behind her disqualification when she received an explanation in response to her Right to Information (RTI) application in December 2016. Despite scoring 160 marks in Part A and 24 marks in the interview, she fell short by only six marks to qualify. The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission had declared her answer paper for the Part-B written examination, conducted in 2014 for Group-II services recruitment, as invalid. The commission cited the inclusion of the phrase “Jai Hind, Let us live united with nature” in the concluding section of her essay as the reason for disqualification.
Kalpana argued that her response was relevant to the question posed, while the TNPSC contended that she had violated specific instructions outlined in para 8 and 16(iii) of the answer book. These instructions explicitly prohibited candidates from including irrelevant or impertinent remarks that could potentially identify them to the examiner.
Justice Battu Davenand, presiding over the case since Kalpana filed her petition in 2017, criticised the TNPSC for not considering the entire essay before deeming the ‘Jai Hind’ remark as ‘impertinent.’ The judge expressed that while writing an essay on the “Importance and conservation of natural resources,” a young scholar might naturally become emotional and express patriotism. He noted, “In such a moment of reflection and soul searching, for some youth, it’s a natural way of expression to end an essay or a speech with some patriotic slogan summarising the essence of the topic such as ‘Jai Hind.'”
The judge also emphasized that “Jai Hind” or “Victory to India” is a commonly used slogan in the country, employed by children in school prayers and eminent speakers at the conclusion of speeches. He argued that only a qualified examiner could determine whether the phrase “Jai Hind – Let us live united with nature” could be considered a suitable conclusion for an essay on the conservation of nature.
In his directive, Justice Battu Davenand instructed the TNPSC to reevaluate Kalpana’s answer papers, award marks accordingly, and, if she met the required score, appoint her to the relevant post within the Combined Civil Services Examination-II, Group-II Services. The court specified a timeline, urging the TNPSC to complete the process within four weeks from the date of receiving the court order.
This decision not only vindicates Kalpana but also sets a precedent by emphasising the importance of considering the context and content of answers rather than dismissing them based on isolated remarks. It highlights the need for a nuanced approach in evaluating examination papers, acknowledging that expressions of patriotism, such as saying ‘Jai Hind,’ should be assessed in the broader context of the topic at hand.
Comments