Ranchi, May 7 The Jharkhand High Court on Wednesday extended the stay on the publication of the state Combined Graduate Level (CGL) examination results conducted by the Staff Selection Commission in 2024.
The decision came during a hearing on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a CBI probe into alleged irregularities in the examination.
A division bench headed by Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao heard the matter, where the state government, represented by Advocate General Rajiv Ranjan, informed the court that the CID is currently investigating the allegations.
He said that no concrete evidence of a paper leak has emerged so far, and the investigation is expected to be completed within a month.
The government also told the court that a charge sheet has been filed against three individuals who had allegedly taken money from candidates under the pretext of providing them with the leaked question paper.
The court directed the state to submit an updated investigation report in the next hearing.
Meanwhile, the petitioners sought additional time to present their arguments. After hearing both sides, the court decided to continue the stay on the exam results and scheduled the next hearing for June 18.
The CGL exam, conducted on September 21 and 22, 2024, was held across 823 centres in Jharkhand to fill over 2,000 government posts.
A total of 3,04,769 candidates appeared for the test. Based on the exam, the Commission had shortlisted 2,145 candidates on December 5, 2024.
Following allegations of a paper leak, Rajesh Kumar and others filed a PIL in the High Court seeking a CBI inquiry.
Responding to the plea, the court had, on December 17, 2024, imposed an interim stay on the result and directed the state to register an FIR under the Jharkhand Examination Conduct Act, 2023, and submit a report after investigation.
Since then, the CID has been probing the matter based on the FIR. At Wednesday’s hearing, Advocate General Rajiv Ranjan appeared for the state, Advocate Sanjoy Piperwal represented JSSC, and senior advocate Ajit Kumar argued for the petitioners.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor