Thread by @barandbench

#SupremeCourt to consider a petition filed by civil service aspirants seeking an extra attempt in the UPSC exams for those candidates who gave the last attempt in the latest exam held in 2020. @DoPTGoI
has stated no extra chance would be given to age barred candidates

Justice AM Khanwilkar: we have to hear it in detail since the Centre does not want to extend the benefit of age barred candidates

Senior Adv Shyam Divan: these candidates were unable to put in their best due to the COVID-19 pandemic. They say they are entitled to another chance. There have been in the past when rules were changed and extra chance was given to candidates

Senior Adv Divan: Petitioners are being hit as they are hit by attempt limit or the age bar. There are SC ST handicapped etc and there are various relaxations to age or attempt bar. 2020 cannot be reckoned at all.. students did not have access to material.

Divan: There are coaching classes which students attend and they could not do so. There was domestic disruptions in their homes and workers were required to be present in frontline and were required for essential services.

Justice Ajay Rastogi asks Divan whether his submission is that his clients could participate but not effectively participate.

#upsc #SupremeCourt

Divan says the impact was across the board but not uniform.

Some were much more disadvantaged than others: Divan.

#upsc #SupremeCourt

Senior Adv Divan: It is an accepted practice to give an extra attempt to candidates who have suffered hardships. Petitioners are not seeking admission etc but only an attempt to appear.

Senior Adv Divan: CSE rules were amended to give an extra attempt to candidates who had appeared for CSE 2011. this amendment was granted in 2015. It was four years later

Divan: in 1993 it was 33 years age limit. In 1992 again 5 years age relaxation was granted

Justice Khanwilkar: There was a judgment in 1992 regarding UPSC age relaxation

(I appeared in that matter, Justice Khanwilkar tells his brother judges)

#SupremeCourt
#UPSC

Divan: We are seeking one year age relaxation from 32 to 33

Justice Khanwilkar: Don't mix age limit with one more attempt

Divan: I agree with that formulation. Please grant an extra attempt across the board as a single homogenous unit

Justice Khanwilkar: You are really espousing for 2,236 candidates. This is because Centre has already agreed for one more attempt for people with last attempt but leaving out the age bar.

Divan: pandemic impact cannot be wished away from the standpoint of exam and preparation. We agree exam was conducted in sterile manner and unlocking might have happened but what need to be looked at is preparations

Divan: There is a differential impact and it is important. There are issues like digital divide or hurdles in issuing of books and impact might have been uniform but it may have affected different candidates in different ways

Divan: Only a level playing field will be created by this extra attempt and no differential treatment be mete out.

#SupremeCourt

Divan : For many of us preparations were deeply and profoundly impacted. Lordships can consider the factors which have been set out.

Justice Khanwilkar: the benefit has to be applied to all and not to only ones who appeared in Oct, 2020

Matter to resume post lunch.

Senior Adv CU Singh to argue.

Advocate Anushree Kapadia: There is a past precedent regarding students who were allowed to appear despite the age bar. It was a 2015 occurrence.

Justice Khanwilkar: Can we issue a direction to the Central government? On point of law ? We know the facts

Senior Advocates PS Narasimha and Pallav Shishodia appears for intervenors

Shishodia: If a policy is arbitrary or discriminatory then the court can interfere with it. Under Article 142 the court can correct this. My client is a DySP and was a covid who fell down with covid19 along with wife and child. After he recovered soon after that exam was there

Shishodia: by 21 days he misses the age bar. There is a need to correct the arbitrariness or discrimination. There is a need to temper Justice with mercy.

Narasimha: many courts have said that it was not possible for individuals to perform their individual duties. This decision for exempt age barred ones is discriminatory and affects the most needy.

Narasimha: When a discretion is excercised in favour of eligible persons then the court can interfere under administrative law. Their decision to excercise discrimination is discriminatory and extra attempt will have no effect on the competing candidate.

Narasimha: All hopes are pinned on the last attempt.. the decision of the Centre is discriminatory. Saying those who did not appear getting no benefits is discriminatory. Arbitrary is not the correct word to usenhere6

Advocate Aditya Chatterjee appears for a class of persons who have co-morbidities: My client has co morbidities. MHA said patients with co morbidity should not step out and for CSE prelims I had to travel to another city.

#UPSCextrachance
#SupremeCourt

Chatterjee: There is a legitimate expectation of candidates to be afforded another attempt since exam was done during #COVID19 pandemic

Advocate Harsh Surana: We appeared for exams in 2019 and interviews were held in February, April and July. We were disadvantaged

Surana: Candidates who appeared for the interview were in face mask and face shield and thus their expressions were not seen

Justice Khanwilkar:Its not dependent on looks

Surana:face shield used to get foggy and is disadvantaged compared to the ones who appeared in Feb or March

Justice Indu Malhotra: everyone was wearing a face mask and face shield then. What's different about you. ?

ASG SV Raju: in an exam of this type. What should be the syllabi, age or number of attempts are all matters of governmental policy. Whether to grant relaxation for age or attempt is matter of policy.

Raju: Courts have held that it cannot interfere to see whether a better policy can be adopted or not or which policy was better

#SupremeCourt
#UPSCexams
#CSEprelims

Justice Khanwilkar: You have a policy now to take candidates from private service to joint secretary level (lateral entry)? There are relaxations there.

Raju: I have not applied my mind to it. But there are promotions too

SC: then? They have no attempts

Raju: We are on a specific class

Justice Ajay Rastogi: For lateral entry, age limit is 45 and no attempt bar. The government is agreeable to give concession to attempts barred but not to age barred ones. But government is allowing entries without age bar

Raju: This is not an exam for last minute preparations. It is prepared for a long time. Here most petitioners have exhausted third fourth or sixth attempt

ASG SV Raju: The general studies paper will take a month to prepare ,an hour each. 2020 was mostly about COVID and what vaccines and what symptoms etc (smiles).
Comprehension is just comprehension

Justice Khanwilkar: It is not about passing the exams but get selected into the 10,000 selected. It is not about 33 percent marks

#SupremeCourt

Raju: all these students have given number of attempts. Now they have come to say give me an additional chance. They have appeared in these papers and knew what are the type of questions. All these COVID problems are "creation problems". They were given 5 extra months

Justice Khanwilkar: They are not challenging the selection process

Raju: if one is appearing in an exam then the document of the same you have to adhere to. Benefit you take but when you don't get the benefit you come here (court)

Raju: without hearing the candidates appearing for 2021 exams no decision can be passed as they will have to face competition from ones who have been given an extra attempt chance to the last attempt one's.

Raju: How can benefit only for last attempt one's, it should be for one's who have lost their first, second, third, fourth or so on chances

#SupremeCourt

Raju: Additional chance is for the hardships caused and hardships was for all

Justice Khanwilkar: then we can say last attempt for 33 years or seven attempts, whichever is more.

Raju: you can say that

ASG Raju: we even allowed candidates to change centres owing to COVID19

#SupremeCourt

Justice Khanwilkar: offer by the Centre was a conditional one. We have to examine it and set it aside and lay down something as issues of arbitrariness and discrimination was raised.

Justice Khanwilkar: either accept the stand of the Centre and not grant extra attempt or to set it aside

Shishodia: please grant benevolence

SC: benevolence cannot be against law

Senior Adv PS Narasimha: Objective is to given an opportunity to all, leaving out all who are most affected will create discrimination.

SC: we will examine it. Once we say it's a policy matter it is so. Let us see

Naresh Kaushik for UPSC: Lateral entry is for director level for above 40 and at joint secretary level above 50. There are exams too for the same.

Justice Khanwilkar: submit a note on this.

Judgment reserved.

#SupremeCourt