Did the Jharkhand HC Just Dismiss the CBI Probe into JSSC-CGL Paper Leak?
Synopsis
Key Takeaways
- The Jharkhand High Court dismissed the plea for a CBI probe.
- The ruling allows for the publication of JSSC-CGL results.
- The examination was held in September 2024.
- Over 3 lakh candidates participated in the exam.
- The court found no substantial evidence for the paper leak claims.
Ranchi, December 3 (NationPress) The Jharkhand High Court has officially dismissed a request for a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) inquiry into the purported paper leak of the Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission's Combined Graduate Level (JSSC-CGL) examination. This decision now facilitates the long-awaited publication of examination results.
A division bench consisting of Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Rajesh Shankar announced this ruling on Wednesday, nearly a month following their reserved judgment on November 3.
The court has instructed the Commission to release the outstanding results promptly.
In earlier hearings, Advocate General Rajiv Ranjan and Advocate Piyush Chitresh represented the state government, while Advocate Sanjay Piparwal argued on behalf of the JSSC.
Representing the petitioners were senior Supreme Court advocate Ajit Kumar Sinha and senior High Court advocate Ajit Kumar.
The competitive JSSC-CGL examination, aimed at recruiting over 2,000 state government positions, took place on September 21 and 22, 2024, at 823 examination centers. Of the 3,04,769 candidates who participated, the Commission announced a shortlist of 2,145 candidates on December 5, 2024.
However, the results' announcement was halted following a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Rajesh Kumar and others, who demanded a CBI investigation due to allegations of compromised examination integrity through leaked question papers.
Responding to these claims, the High Court imposed a temporary stay on the results release on December 17, 2024.
After several hearings, the state government informed the bench that the Crime Investigation Department (CID) found no significant evidence supporting the allegations of a paper leak, and the Commission's counsel denied any irregularities in the examination process.
Conversely, the petitioners insisted on the necessity for a central agency investigation, citing similarities in question papers, supposed videos from outside examination centers, and other circumstantial evidence.
The court's ruling against the CBI probe and its order to publish the results have provided relief to countless candidates eagerly awaiting the next phase of recruitment.