Kerala HC questions PSC probe: Why was key person not interrogated?
Synopsis
The Kerala High Court has openly questioned how the Crime Branch can credibly investigate PSC exam irregularities without interrogating the most central figure in the selection process — and warned that a cosy PSC-government relationship would give citizens reason to distrust public recruitment entirely.
Key Takeaways
The Kerala High Court on 24 October 2026 questioned why the key person in the PSC selection process had not been questioned by the Crime Branch .
The court warned that if the PSC and government were seen as 'bhai bhai' , public trust in the recruitment process would be undermined.
The Crime Branch alleges 10 questions worth 58 marks were left unevaluated in the July 2023 examination for Chief of the Industry and Infrastructure Division.
Original topper Arun J.
Prathap joined the Planning Board; after revaluation, Shyam Krishnan moved to first while Prathap slipped to fifth.
The PSC maintains the lapse was a clerical error; the Crime Branch is investigating whether it was deliberate.
The case is next listed on 27 October for further hearing.
The Kerala High Court on Saturday, 24 October 2026, sharply questioned the pace and conduct of the Crime Branch probe into alleged irregularities in a Kerala Public Service Commission (PSC) examination held for a senior post in the State Planning Board. The court demanded to know how an investigation could progress without the key person involved in the selection process even being questioned.
Court's Pointed Observations
In a notable remark, the court observed that if the PSC and the government were 'bhai bhai' (like brothers), citizens would have legitimate reasons to doubt the integrity of the recruitment process. The bench made these observations while hearing the PSC's petition seeking to quash the Crime Branch investigation into the alleged recruitment irregularities. The court has now scheduled the next hearing for 27 October.
PSC vs Government: The Core Dispute
The state government informed the court that the investigation was still ongoing but alleged that the PSC was not cooperating with the probe. The PSC, for its part, has maintained that the alleged irregularities stemmed from a clerical error and that there was no deliberate attempt to manipulate the selection process. It has sought termination of the investigation, contending the probe was not authorised under applicable rules. The government countered that no such rules barred the investigation from proceeding.
What the Examination Irregularities Involve
The case centres on the recruitment of a Chief for the Industry and Infrastructure Division of the State Planning Board. The PSC conducted the relevant examination in July 2023, and the selection came under scrutiny after a candidate discovered that several questions in the answer scripts had not been evaluated. The Crime Branch has alleged that 10 questions carrying a total of 58 marks were left unevaluated, affecting the answer scripts of multiple candidates who appeared for the exam.
How Rankings Shifted After Revaluation
The original ranked list placed Arun J. Prathap first, and he subsequently joined the Planning Board. Shyam Krishnan, who was ranked third initially, challenged the evaluation. Following revaluation and fresh interviews, Krishnan moved to the first position while Prathap slipped to fifth. The Crime Branch is investigating whether the unevaluated questions represent a genuine oversight or a deliberate act of wrongdoing — a distinction that carries significant legal and administrative consequences.
What Comes Next
The court's observations have added fresh pressure on the PSC, which is constitutionally mandated to ensure fair and transparent public recruitment. With the case listed for 27 October, all eyes are on whether the Crime Branch will be directed to question the key individual central to the selection process — a step the court has indicated it considers essential to a credible probe.
Point of View
Before that body has even questioned the central figure, raises a procedural red flag the court has rightly seized on. The rank reversal — from first to fifth after revaluation of just 10 unevaluated questions — is a statistically dramatic shift that demands explanation beyond 'clerical error'. If the PSC is allowed to stonewall the probe and then seek its termination, it sets a damaging precedent for accountability in public recruitment across the country.
NationPress
24 Oct 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Kerala PSC exam irregularities case about?
The case involves alleged irregularities in a Kerala PSC examination held in July 2023 for the post of Chief of the Industry and Infrastructure Division of the State Planning Board. The Crime Branch alleges that 10 questions worth 58 marks were left unevaluated, causing a significant shift in candidate rankings after revaluation.
Why did the Kerala High Court question the probe?
The court asked how the Crime Branch investigation could progress without questioning the key person involved in the selection process. It also cautioned that a perception of closeness between the PSC and the government would erode public confidence in recruitment.
What is the PSC's position on the investigation?
The PSC has argued that the unevaluated questions were the result of a clerical error and not deliberate manipulation. It has petitioned the court to quash the Crime Branch probe, contending the investigation is not authorised under applicable rules.
How did the candidate rankings change after revaluation?
Arun J. Prathap, who was originally ranked first and had already joined the Planning Board, slipped to fifth after revaluation. Shyam Krishnan, initially ranked third, moved to first position following the re-evaluation and fresh interviews.
When is the next hearing in the Kerala PSC case?
The Kerala High Court has posted the case for further consideration on 27 October 2026.
