Srinagar, Jan 21 (JKNS): The declaration of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission’s (JKPSC) Civil Judge (Junior Division) Mains Examination–2025 results has sparked sharp reactions, with aspirants alleging serious irregularities in the evaluation process and demanding an independent inquiry.
According to the JKPSC notification, 124 candidates have been shortlisted for the viva voce stage. However, soon after the results were announced, a group of aspirants from the Kashmir division assembled outside the JKPSC office at Solina, Srinagar, questioning the transparency and credibility of the selection process.
Aspirants told news agency JKNS that the evaluation of the mains examination was completed in an unusually short span of around six weeks, despite more than 1,000 candidates appearing in the exam and each candidate having written multiple papers. They said this raised doubts over whether proper scrutiny was carried out.
“One thousand candidates writing nine papers each means nearly 10,000 answer scripts. Completing such an exercise in this short time is hard to believe. We are not opposing merit, but we want a fair and transparent process,” an aspirant said, adding that only 13 candidates from the Kashmir division being shortlisted for interviews had further intensified concerns.
The protesters also highlighted what they described as glaring anomalies, alleging that an entire examination centre at the JKPSC office in Srinagar reportedly produced no successful candidates. They termed the outcome statistically improbable and said it strengthened suspicions of flaws in evaluation.
Aspirants further pointed out that while the Judicial Services Mains results were declared swiftly, the mains examination of the JKPSC Civil Services conducted in 2023 is still awaiting evaluation, raising questions about inconsistent standards and priorities.
Appealing to Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha, the aspirants urged him to intervene and order a thorough and impartial probe into the matter. They also sought the intervention of the Chief Secretary, demanding that the interview process be kept on hold until all grievances are addressed.
“We are even ready for a re-examination if required. Our only demand is fairness and transparency,” the aspirants said, warning that they may explore legal options, including approaching investigative agencies, if their concerns are ignored.
Several candidates also expressed anguish over age and attempt-related constraints, stating that for many of them this examination was their final opportunity. They said any unfair evaluation could permanently derail their careers.
The aspirants maintained that alleged irregularities in a judicial recruitment process not only affect candidates but also undermine public confidence in the justice delivery system. (JKNS)
