The commission is expected to submit its report by May 31, 2025, with the UPPSC directed to provide full logistical support for its operation.
Allahabad: The Allahabad High Court has appointed a commission led by Justice Govind Mathur, former Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court, to reform the evaluation process of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission’s (UPPSC) Judicial Services Examination 2022.
The court’s decision follows its observations of substantial flaws in the conduct and assessment of the UPPCS(J)-2022 exam.
A bench consisting of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Donadi Ramesh highlighted issues such as the absence of standardized marking systems, an overemphasis on theoretical questions rather than analytical reasoning, and inconsistent evaluation practices. These shortcomings, the court noted, compromise the credibility of the selection process and erode public trust in the Commission’s integrity.
The newly established commission will be responsible for recommending improvements to make the evaluation process more trustworthy, transparent, and fair. It will also suggest ways to ensure that the prescribed evaluation procedures are followed, address any procedural lapses, and explain the UPPSC’s failure to self-correct before declaring the results.
The commission is expected to submit its report by May 31, 2025, with the UPPSC directed to provide full logistical support for its operation.
The ruling after a petition filed by Shravan Pandey, represented by Senior Advocate Syed Farman Ahmad Naqvi and Advocate Shashwat Anand. Pandey claimed that his answer sheet had been swapped with another candidate’s during evaluation.
He discovered the issue after exercising his rights under the Right to Information Act and reviewing his answer sheets. Following court orders, UPPSC acknowledged its mistake, explaining that errors in the anonymization process resulted in the mismatch.
Although UPPSC took corrective actions, such as allowing all 3,019 candidates to inspect their answer sheets and issuing a revised merit list, the court criticized the UPPSC for making unilateral changes, including altering interview eligibility.
The court stressed the importance of accountability, instructing the UPPSC to submit a detailed affidavit on the corrections made and their impact on the merit list. The court referred to the errors, which led to mishandling of answer sheets and discrepancies in evaluation, as a “blunderous mistake.”
Furthermore, the court emphasized that affected candidates must have their grievances promptly addressed, especially since some selected candidates have already started training.
The case is scheduled to be among the top ten cases for hearing in the first week of July 2025.
Case Title: Shravan Pandey vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others
