The Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC) has come under scrutiny after including a question on the launch date of the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) in the preliminary examination for Last Grade Servants conducted at the end of July 2026, triggering allegations of ideological bias and historical distortion in the state’s recruitment examinations.
Question No. 34 in the examination paper asked candidates to identify the date on which the CJP was launched, offering four options: May 18, May 17, May 16 and May 19, 2026.
Critics point out that no organisation called the Cockroach Janata Party has been registered either as a political party or as a cultural organisation in the country, raising questions over why such a subject found a place in a PSC examination.
P.S. Gopakumar, Dakshina Kshethra Pramukh of Akhil Bharatiya Rashtriya Shaikshik Maha Sangh, questioned what significance the CJP holds to merit inclusion in a PSC question paper.
He said the inclusion indirectly conveys to students and youth that the launch of the CJP is an important historical event deserving academic recognition.
Another controversial question, No. 12, asked candidates to identify the first uprising in Kerala against the East India Company. The options were: Pazhassi’s revolt, Malabar riots, Kallumala agitation and Attingal revolt, with the expected answer being the Attingal revolt.
Critics argue that placing the Malabar riots alongside recognised freedom struggles and social reform movements creates a misleading historical narrative. While Pazhassi’s revolt is regarded as a landmark freedom struggle and the Kallumala agitation was a social reform movement led by Mahatma Ayyankali, the Malabar riots are viewed by many historians as a communal uprising.
Gopakumar alleged that the framing of the question attempts to whitewash the nature of the Malabar riots by placing them in the same category as freedom movements and reform campaigns.
Observers argue that such historical distortions gain institutional legitimacy once they are endorsed through official examination papers and accepted as correct answers by academic bodies.
They contend that the framing of questions and answer choices can gradually reshape historical understanding by repeatedly presenting selected narratives and dates as significant while downplaying established historical facts.
According to these critics, what may appear to be isolated errors or oversights is, on closer examination, part of a systematic process of institutionalising disputed historical interpretations. They argue that once such narratives enter competitive examinations, they acquire academic validation, making future correction increasingly difficult as generations of students accept them as authentic history.
They further allege that this represents a long-term strategy in which controversial content is introduced incrementally, while retaining the ability to dismiss criticism as inadvertent mistakes whenever objections arise.
Gopakumar further alleged that the pattern seen in the PSC examination reflects a broader attempt to legitimise organisations and narratives that, according to him, are anti-national.
Referring to the recent Delhi riots, he claimed they demonstrated the anti-social and anti-national character of the CJP, yet alleged that several non-BJP/NDA political parties continue to glorify the organisation and similar forces due to what he described as their ideological opposition to the BJP, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the RSS and Hindutva.
