Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) is a constitutional body which conduct top level examinations such as Civil Service Examination which select candidates for IAS ,IPS, IFS,IRS etc. Functioning of this body is so secrete and undemocratic that it doesn’t bother to give proper reply to candidates under Right to Information Act. Transparency Seekers for Accountability is a NGO fighting against such opaque behavior of UPSC .The recent example of adamant attitude of UPSC can be seen after the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CBSE v/s Aditya Bandopadhyay directing all examination bodies to provide photocopy of answersheets of candidates under RTI act wherein it is clearly stated by Hon’ble Supreme Court that under no exemption under Section 8 of RTI act the answersheets can be denied to the candidates, even after this judgment UPSC replied to the candidates that under Section 8 (1) (d) of RTI act photocopy of answersheets can not be given.Thus, committing deliberate Contempt of Court .There are large scale allegations of corruption and fraud in Civil Services Examination in the name of scaling and moderation system. When UPSC in not giving any information it is very difficult to unearth the irregularities , still We have found out few cases of fraud which are tip of iceberg and are given below:-
1.Ratipal Saroj case:-. In 1985 the CBI registered a case under sections 420, 464, 471 and 120-B of IPC and also Prevention of Corruption Act against one Ratipal Saroj and four employees of UPSC. Mr Saroj was selected in Civil Service Examinations 1985 and was declared as number 3 in the merit list. A letter was written by certain candidates of Allahabad centre to the Prime Minister raising their suspicion and requested him to look into the matter. Accordingly CBI enquiry was ordered. CBI inquiries revealed that Mr Saroj joined the UPSC as section officer and then was promoted to the post of Deputy Secretary. He was well known to a number of officers in UPSC to whom he had been supplying various articles from time to time. It was alleged that he replaced his answer sheets with the new ones in collusion with the officers. He was arrested by CBI for the alleged offences and was suspended from service.
2. In case of Ravi Jindal, a candidate of Civil Services Main Examinition-2005, When he applied under RTI for photocopy of his answersheets after Hon’ble Supreme Court judgement in Civil Appeal No. 6454 of 2011 in CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION & Anr. v. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors regarding providing candidates photocopy of their answersheets . UPSC in reply letter dated 14/9/2011 said that the said judgement is being studied and further information will be provided in due course of time and then in letter dated 24/10/2011 UPSC claimed that as he didn’t approached the CAT , PB, New Delhi on time ,so his copies are destroyed as per normal retention schedule(which is November 2006) . But, here they forgot that they had brought the answersheets of candidate in Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on 3/09/2007 ( that means nearly ten months after the expiry of Normal retiontion Schedule).
In case of Ashish Gupta and Sonia Chahar ,wherein UPSC replied to Ashish Gupta and Sonia Chahar that their answersheets have been destroyed, but to Shi Chittaranjan Kumar ,they replied that his answersheets are intact. (all of them are candidates of Civil Services Main Examination-2008 and party in O.A. No:1252/2009 CAT,PB,New Delhi.). This example itself proves that UPSC thinks itself above all institutions of this Country, including Hon’ble Supreme Court and reflects the adamant attitude of UPSC.
3. In case of Dr.Prashant Chakkarwar , a candidate for Civil Services Examination-2008 , it was claimed in reply of UPSC dated 8/2/2010 that his answersheets have been double checked/double scrutinised in response to his complaint application dated 30/09/2009 and reminder dated 19/1/2010. Thus, UPSC have double checked/double scrutinised petitioner’s answersheets nearly 80 days after weeding out of answersheets of Civil services(Main) Examination-2008 (Answersheets of Civil Services Main Examinition -2008 have been destroyed/weeded out by UPSC on 17/11/2009,as claimed by UPSC in its reply to Shri.Manish Sitaramji Kamatkar dated 9/4/2010).
4..In the case of Chittranjan Kumar, a candidate for Civil Services Examination-2008 , when he requested the UPSC for rechecking the papers of Hindi paper II, the UPSC responded vide letter dated 16.6.2009 that the total number of answer-sheets used by him was 2. When he further applied for details of the number and serial No. of the copies, the UPSC replied vide letter dated 22.7.2009 and thereby stated the number of answer-sheets of Hindi paper II was 3. However, in fact that the candidate had written four answer-sheets in Hindi Paper II.
5. Bogus Roll numbers are allotted every year ,the data which we have found through RTI queries are given below:
Year of Exam Extra roll numbers
When enquired further about bogus roll numbers, UPSC replied that it is due to mix up of roll numbers of other examinations conducted by it. It is absolutely fraud because the application form are computer readable and there is no chance of any mix up.
6. Brijees Arzoo Case:
He appeared in Civil Services Examination-2005. when his result was posted on internet, he was shown absent in Urdu Paper in the written examination. He filed RTI application, asserting that he was present in the Urdu paper. Within three days a new result was posted on internet showing Mr. Arzoo’s marks in Urdu literature.
7. Two separate marks sheets were issued to Manish Jain: He appeared in Civil Services mains Examination -2001 with optional History and Geography . First he was issued marksheet with Philosophy and Hindi literature after four years and when it was brought to UPSC’s notice they issued another marksheet showing History and Geography as his optionals.
8. In case of Nitin Verma, a resident of Jabalpur who appeared for the Civil Services Examination 2001. He secured 278th place in the merit list. However not satisfied with his result alleging some mess up in the valuation of his marks in the examination and his mark sheet, he filed a petition before Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT). On the order of CAT when UPSC revaluated his answer sheet it found that that candidate actually got more marks and improved his merit position and placed him at 28th position.
9. UPSC have said in Affidavit dated 27/06/2011 to Dr.Prashant Chakkarwar, wherein it is claimed that marks given to candidate by original examiner are masked/overwritten multiple times during moderation process. This itself is prima-facie evidence of manipulation and is against the norms of Standard Evaluation System. Even in Board Examinations the marks given by Examiner and Head Examiner are written in separate columns with different coloured ink pen.
10. In 1985 Examinations, when the result was declared, it was found that none from Bhopal Center was selected for interview. The candidates from that Center made representations to the UPSC. When the Press took up the matter, the UPSC conducted inquiries and it was found that the answer-sheets of General Studies-II of all 95/97 candidates of that Center were lost and were untraceable. As such, fresh examination was held for these candidates as a result of which, 25 of them were called for interview. Out of these 25, 22, were finally declared successful.
These examples shows that UPSC is acting as Mother of Corruption in India. If one Fraud IAS/IPS officer is selected whole district will suffer. If they are selected through fraud means What moral authority these officers have to check corruption in lower level of Bureaucracy. It is high time, when whole India is going through Anti-Corruption Movement led by noted Gandhian Shri. Anna Hazareji , to attack at origin of Corruption.
UPSC is executing this fraud in the name of scaling / moderation.
What is scaling/moderation system:-
Civil services Examination is three staged examination- Preliminary, Mains , Interview.
Candidates have to opt for two optionals papers among list of 51 optionals such as History, Geography, physics , engineering, Medical sciences…….. etc. along with compulsory General studies paper. UPSC says that they apply scaling/moderation for two purpose:-
1. to rationalise interexaminer variation: i.e. some examiners are strict and give very low marks ,while some are liberal and and give very high scores .So as to reduce this difference they do scaling/ moderation by some statistical method.
2. Inter-Subject Scaling/moderation: Some subjects are very high scoring such as science subjects as compared to art subjects. Even at times paper of some subject may be easy as compared to other subjects. Hence, so as to bring balance in all subjects inter-subject scaling / moderation is done by Linear Transformation Method.
The idea behind this is good. But in practice UPSC is doing large scale manipulation under garb of scaling/moderation
In case of Inter-examiner scaling/moderation. UPSC says that they arrange the meeting of Head Examiner and other examiner and some standards are set regarding evaluation of each question. If the Head examiner found that the other examiner have deviated from set standards he downgrade/upgrade marks accordingly. Concept is good. But when we asked them to show us the set standards i.e. Model answersheets , they said that it doesn’t exists. What a joke? when all basis of inter-examiner scaling/moderation is set standards , UPSC says that it does not exists. According to UPSC the set standards are oral discussions which examiners have to remember for the whole period of two months of evaluation process. Even in Board Examination there are Model Answersheets . How can a constitutional body like UPSC takes casual attitude in conducting the most prestigious examination of this country.
In case of Inter-Subject Scaling/Moderation , When they says that it is done to bring balance between marks of different subjects it should be reflected in final results. But the case is not so which can be seen by analysis of data of Civil Services (Main) Examination-2007 which shows that no balance is achieved between all optional subjects after applying statistical moderation by Linear Transformation Method as the Mean marks ranges from 210(Physics) to 333(Maithili Literature), Minimum marks ranges from 0 to 376(Arabic literature) , Maximum marks ranges from 258(French literature) to 406 (Zoology). Thus, the whole process has lost its way in the maze of statistics applied without proper application of mind.
Even the Linear scaling which UPSC use to do inter-subject moderation is found to be faulty by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Sanjay Singh v/s Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission.
UPSC do not show the candidates their actual marks scored on papers , but gives scaled/moderated marks. We are fighting to bring the transparency in this examination which selects the top ranks officials who shapes the destiny of this country. We have won the Shiv shanbhu case in Hon’ble Supreme Court regarding disclosing of actual / raw marks , scaling/moderation formula and to bring overall transparency in conduct of Civil Services Examination . As a result of which they have changed pattern of preliminary examination and there will be no scaling in Preliminary stage. There are many court cases going against UPSC in relation to Civil Services Examination.
In one of the RTI reply ,UPSC said that they have spend 105 crore rupees on Court cases since 2006. Is this extravagant use of public money justified to save its skin from potential exposure of fraud if they disclose the actual marks of candidates.
When we are fighting against this in Hon’ble Delhi High Court , Hon’ble Supreme Court and after the decision of Hon;ble Supreme Court in CBSE V/S Aditya Bandopadhyay regarding allowing candidates to get certified copies of their answwersheets , the Secretary, Dept . of Personnel Mrs . Alka Sirohi said to media that they are changing Mains Examination from coming 2012 Civil Services Examination. But , they should keep in mind that they
have to give answer to people of India about the fraud committed by UPSC since 1979 in the name of Scaling/Moderation……..
TRANSPARENCY SEEKERS FOR ACCOUNTABILITY.
Contact Us : email@example.com