The Political High Handedness in Haryana-II I have sought some information through RTI and it was learnt from the information or inspection of records that the interview was the sole criteria of that selection as the marks for personal achievements (out of 40 marks) were just common (25 marks for STET) to all qualified candidates except a few candidates who were either having M.Phil (5 marks) and Ph.D (5 marks) or other items covered under (b) Co-curricular Activities/Sports/ Distinction (5 marks). Even a blind man can judge that the marks in intervie were given under a well-planned strategy so that the candidates of their choice can be brought in merit. In that way, interview was just an eye- wash and made sole basis of selection giving chance of every manipulation. Even injustice had been done while selecting (or awarding marks in interview) the SC and BC candidates as none of the SC and BC candidates had been given more marks than to the last candidate of the general category in the so-called Interview of 60 marks. See the fun as the qualifications from Matriculation to M.A/M.SC/B.Ed/NET etc. were given no weight-age during the interview as well as while making merit of the candidates. It is an open secret that the merit lists of the candidates to be selected and recommended by the HPSC later on were made much before the Interview out of qualified candidates by the confidents of the Chief Minister as per his unwritten/verbal direction and approval. In the case of Lecturers (school cadre) in the subject of Political Science, the merit list of candidates was made either during the Interview or after the Interview as the Chief Minister was busy in the election of member of Rajya Sabha and might not finalise the list of candidates to be selected. That was the only reason for declaring the result after one and half month for the subject in question. I can challenge the qualifications and capabilities of a few candidates from the general category who have been got selected and appointed as a result of devising wrong and illegal criteria for selection by HPSC/ Govt. of Haryana just to favour their own candidates on pick & choose basis. As per records seen during the “Inspection of Records” it was learnt that marks in the Interview were awarded later on just keeping in mind the fact that which candidates in all the categories were to be selected/ recommended for appointment. The fact can be confirmed by seeing the following details of some candidates selected in General and BC categories and same was position of SC candidates whose marks could not be note down: Sr.No.Description Marks out of 40 Marks out of 60 Total Merit for P. Achievements for Interview Marks 1. First candidate in the merit list of Gen category. 30 49 79 First 2. First candidate in the merit list of B.C. category. 30 32 62 First 3. Last candidate in the merit list of Gen category. 25 39 64 Last 4. Last candidate in the merit list of B.C. category. 25 32 57 Last It is very clear from the above description that though the Gen and BC candidates who stood first in the merit were got 30 marks each in personal achievements but in the interview the BC candidate was awarded 17 marks less than the General candidate. In the same way the last candidates of Gen and BC categories got equal marks i.e. 25 in personal achievements but the BC candidate was awarded 7 marks less than the General candidate. What is this? This is total manipulation and a well and pre- planned strategy to keep the B.C and S.C. candidates at the bottom of the merit list of general candidates so that none of the meritorious candidates out of B.C and S.C. can be placed in the list of general candidates. The criteria for selection of Lecturers (School cadre) in 2012 was not declared at the time of notification of advertisement but it was made while making the selections by conducting eye-wash interviews just to manipulate the selections under a well-planned strategy. How can 60 marks out of 100 be allotted for interview when the selections were made on large scale for thousands of posts of Lecturers in all subjects. Even how can equal marks i.e. 25 be awarded to all qualified candidates without keeping in mind their essential qualifications for the post and the marks got in the STET and Screening Test. Awarding 25 marks for STET examination to all candidates whether one got 70% and other got 50%. Only one can be taken as qualifying out of STET and Screening test. The marks of the other should be taken in the merit list otherwise what will be important of higher marks in these two tests. Besides, no weight-age was given for qualifications whatsoever it was and whatsoever division and marks were. Can a third class M.A. without B.Ed degree be better than a first class M.A. with first class B.Ed degree. These were some points to be taken into account while making the merit of the candidates. The candidates with First class post-graduate degree in the subject and having first class B.Ed and M.phil degrees were ignored for selection whereas simple third class M.As might have found place in the merit as the criteria for selection was just sole interview and it was the main source of manipulation and bungling in the selections. Even a NET qualified candidate from UGC was not found place in the merit list as no one in the interview board was supposed to listen about the achievements and performance of a candidate as they were just fulfilling the formalities of Interview, whereas the marks for interview were either allotted earlier or later on keeping in mind the merit lists of selected candidates prepared by the Chief Minister’s team of confidents from the lists of qualified candidates made by HPSC. If anybody has any doubt in the matter, let a CBI inquiry be made and see the outcome. I appeal all the qualified and meritorious candidates of all categories in all subjects for the post of Lecturer (School Cadre) in respect of Advt. No 3 who could not find place in the merit list of selected/ recommended candidates be prepared for filing a civil suit jointly in the court of law or a PIL be taken up either by the Punjab and Haryana High Court or by the honourable Supreme Court of India considering the matter a common cause for justice. Otherwise, all such manipulation and bungling will go on without any intervention causing unbearable sufferings to the common men having no political approach and money power.
Posted on: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 10:30:08 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015