I would have cleared this exam both the times conducted. wrote again despite there's no wrong on my side. It's injustice to write again. What if I didn't get required marks in re exam for 3rd time? Then who will provide me justice then? Does court entertain my concern?
Stop doing dramas in d name of kannada. There are 8-9 major mistakes & remainingare minor errors. do u think candidates who did prelims hailed from srilanka.. v r also born n brought up in karnataka...all loosers who haven't done well in prelims are demanding reexam..
@@RamaprabhaSR I completely resonate with your issue. Only expert committee can bring out how many were major or minor issue. Grace marks is definitely a solution if no of erroneous questions are 6 to 7. Beyond that it hurts those students who have accurately answered those questions
Problem is again people ask for more time for mains preparation. Inspite of sufficient time after notification. Students will always seek excuses, and genuine aspirants suffer at last.
If exam is cancelled and prelims to be conducted again, what is the guarantee these loosers from AKSAA will not raise any other silly issues to further thr political career. Justt for the sake of growing thr political career, these ppl r ruining the life of very serious aspirants. Sir, will it not be a injustice to ask english medium students to write prelims for the 3rd time?
### **Judicial Proceedings Supporting Re-examinations Due to Translation Errors** --- ### **1. Madras High Court - NEET 2018 Case** - **Incident**: Errors in the Tamil translation of 49 questions in the NEET 2018 exam disadvantaged Tamil-medium students. - **Judgment**: - The **Madras High Court** ordered the awarding of **196 grace marks** to students who attempted the exam in Tamil. The court observed that translation errors violated the **Right to Equality (Article 14)**. - The **Supreme Court of India** later stayed the Madras High Court order but directed authorities to ensure translation accuracy in future exams. - **Relevance**: The case highlights the judiciary's recognition of translation errors as a violation of fairness and equality. - **Case Reference**: *K. Kanimozhi v. National Testing Agency (2018)*. --- ### **2. Telangana State Public Service Commission (TSPSC) - Paper Leak Case (2023)** - **Incident**: The TSPSC Assistant Engineer exam faced allegations of a question paper leak. - **Judgment**: - The **Telangana High Court** directed the cancellation of the exam and mandated a **re-examination** to ensure integrity and fairness. - **Relevance**: Reinforces the judiciary's commitment to upholding transparency in recruitment processes. --- ### **3. Rajasthan High Court - REET 2021 Case** - **Incident**: Inaccurate translations and allegations of cheating during the REET 2021 exam prompted judicial intervention. - **Judgment**: - The **Rajasthan High Court** directed a re-examination for the affected categories, citing procedural irregularities and fairness concerns. - **Relevance**: Emphasizes that translation errors and procedural lapses compromise the integrity of recruitment exams. - **Case Reference**: *Shiv Charan Gupta v. Rajasthan Public Service Commission (2021)*. --- ### **4. K. Manjusree v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2008)** - **Incident**: Errors in evaluation criteria for a recruitment examination conducted by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission (APPSC). - **Judgment**: - The **Supreme Court** held that deviations from established procedures, including translation or evaluation errors, are unconstitutional. - Directed a **re-exam** to rectify the issue. - **Relevance**: Reinforces the need for strict adherence to procedural fairness in recruitment exams. --- ### **5. Mohd. Shujat Ali v. Union of India (1974)** - **Principle Established**: - Recruitment processes must be **fair, non-discriminatory, and merit-based**. - Translation errors that favor one group of candidates over another violate **Article 16 (Equal Opportunity in Public Employment)**. - **Relevance**: Sets a benchmark for equitable treatment in recruitment exams, including language considerations. --- ### **6. Prakash Ratan Sinha v. State of Bihar (2009)** - **Incident**: Allegations of irregularities, including question paper errors, in the Bihar Public Service Commission (BPSC) prelims. - **Judgment**: - The **Supreme Court** directed the cancellation of the exam and mandated a **fresh examination** to ensure justice and fairness for all candidates. - **Relevance**: Highlights judicial insistence on corrective measures for procedural errors. --- ### **7. Ramesh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan** - **Incident**: Translation errors and discrepancies in the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC) exams. - **Judgment**: - The Rajasthan High Court observed that such errors violated candidates’ rights and directed corrective measures, including **re-evaluations or re-examinations**. - **Relevance**: Establishes judicial support for rectifying translation-related errors. --- ### **8. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)** - **Principle Established**: - Any administrative action that is **arbitrary, unfair, or discriminatory** violates **Article 14 (Right to Equality)**. - **Relevance**: Translation errors in recruitment exams, which create inequalities among candidates, are considered arbitrary and unjust under this precedent. --- ### **Conclusion** The judiciary in India has consistently upheld that **translation errors, procedural irregularities, and question paper leaks** in recruitment examinations violate constitutional principles of **equality, fairness, and transparency**. Courts have mandated **re-examinations** or other corrective measures to restore the integrity of such processes, ensuring justice for all candidates.
yes sir kpsc has to cancel this exam and do re notification ... and as you said they have to do exam within 9 months with no other mistakes by kpsc and give result as early as possible ... well analysis sir .
Increasing ratio for mains is best..
Or Renotification would be best to avoid any court case..
I would have cleared this exam both the times conducted. wrote again despite there's no wrong on my side. It's injustice to write again. What if I didn't get required marks in re exam for 3rd time? Then who will provide me justice then? Does court entertain my concern?
True.. Smaga Kantkumar ge chapli li hodre sari agutte
Bose maga ava kanthkumar
@@Believer-Believer123😂😂
U fight for ur rights
They will fight for there rights
Hisab barabar.
U have said correct
There is a very well point in your talk sir. It will be Win-win for everyone. Students need to consider it.
Thanks Sir. Request you to kindly highlight my video in your official TH-cam channel.
Stop doing dramas in d name of kannada. There are 8-9 major mistakes & remainingare minor errors. do u think candidates who did prelims hailed from srilanka.. v r also born n brought up in karnataka...all loosers who haven't done well in prelims are demanding reexam..
@@RamaprabhaSR I completely resonate with your issue. Only expert committee can bring out how many were major or minor issue. Grace marks is definitely a solution if no of erroneous questions are 6 to 7. Beyond that it hurts those students who have accurately answered those questions
@@kumar-vs4xiwe shred it. Change the name of Video to " KAS Re Exam Complete Legal Analysis" from 12 January 2025
@panchajanyaias R u still finding out errors in the papers? Pls find if thr r any full stop, comma error n then say 200 out of 200 questions r wrong.
Grace marks for contextual errors and fallowed by selection of 1:30 for mains.
Problem is again people ask for more time for mains preparation. Inspite of sufficient time after notification. Students will always seek excuses, and genuine aspirants suffer at last.
If exam is cancelled and prelims to be conducted again, what is the guarantee these loosers from AKSAA will not raise any other silly issues to further thr political career. Justt for the sake of growing thr political career, these ppl r ruining the life of very serious aspirants.
Sir, will it not be a injustice to ask english medium students to write prelims for the 3rd time?
### **Judicial Proceedings Supporting Re-examinations Due to Translation Errors**
---
### **1. Madras High Court - NEET 2018 Case**
- **Incident**: Errors in the Tamil translation of 49 questions in the NEET 2018 exam disadvantaged Tamil-medium students.
- **Judgment**:
- The **Madras High Court** ordered the awarding of **196 grace marks** to students who attempted the exam in Tamil. The court observed that translation errors violated the **Right to Equality (Article 14)**.
- The **Supreme Court of India** later stayed the Madras High Court order but directed authorities to ensure translation accuracy in future exams.
- **Relevance**: The case highlights the judiciary's recognition of translation errors as a violation of fairness and equality.
- **Case Reference**: *K. Kanimozhi v. National Testing Agency (2018)*.
---
### **2. Telangana State Public Service Commission (TSPSC) - Paper Leak Case (2023)**
- **Incident**: The TSPSC Assistant Engineer exam faced allegations of a question paper leak.
- **Judgment**:
- The **Telangana High Court** directed the cancellation of the exam and mandated a **re-examination** to ensure integrity and fairness.
- **Relevance**: Reinforces the judiciary's commitment to upholding transparency in recruitment processes.
---
### **3. Rajasthan High Court - REET 2021 Case**
- **Incident**: Inaccurate translations and allegations of cheating during the REET 2021 exam prompted judicial intervention.
- **Judgment**:
- The **Rajasthan High Court** directed a re-examination for the affected categories, citing procedural irregularities and fairness concerns.
- **Relevance**: Emphasizes that translation errors and procedural lapses compromise the integrity of recruitment exams.
- **Case Reference**: *Shiv Charan Gupta v. Rajasthan Public Service Commission (2021)*.
---
### **4. K. Manjusree v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2008)**
- **Incident**: Errors in evaluation criteria for a recruitment examination conducted by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission (APPSC).
- **Judgment**:
- The **Supreme Court** held that deviations from established procedures, including translation or evaluation errors, are unconstitutional.
- Directed a **re-exam** to rectify the issue.
- **Relevance**: Reinforces the need for strict adherence to procedural fairness in recruitment exams.
---
### **5. Mohd. Shujat Ali v. Union of India (1974)**
- **Principle Established**:
- Recruitment processes must be **fair, non-discriminatory, and merit-based**.
- Translation errors that favor one group of candidates over another violate **Article 16 (Equal Opportunity in Public Employment)**.
- **Relevance**: Sets a benchmark for equitable treatment in recruitment exams, including language considerations.
---
### **6. Prakash Ratan Sinha v. State of Bihar (2009)**
- **Incident**: Allegations of irregularities, including question paper errors, in the Bihar Public Service Commission (BPSC) prelims.
- **Judgment**:
- The **Supreme Court** directed the cancellation of the exam and mandated a **fresh examination** to ensure justice and fairness for all candidates.
- **Relevance**: Highlights judicial insistence on corrective measures for procedural errors.
---
### **7. Ramesh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan**
- **Incident**: Translation errors and discrepancies in the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC) exams.
- **Judgment**:
- The Rajasthan High Court observed that such errors violated candidates’ rights and directed corrective measures, including **re-evaluations or re-examinations**.
- **Relevance**: Establishes judicial support for rectifying translation-related errors.
---
### **8. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)**
- **Principle Established**:
- Any administrative action that is **arbitrary, unfair, or discriminatory** violates **Article 14 (Right to Equality)**.
- **Relevance**: Translation errors in recruitment exams, which create inequalities among candidates, are considered arbitrary and unjust under this precedent.
---
### **Conclusion**
The judiciary in India has consistently upheld that **translation errors, procedural irregularities, and question paper leaks** in recruitment examinations violate constitutional principles of **equality, fairness, and transparency**. Courts have mandated **re-examinations** or other corrective measures to restore the integrity of such processes, ensuring justice for all candidates.
Very nice analysis my dear friend
Atleast provide to this AKSSA Lawyers 😅
What if error question removed ..and give marks for remaining questions...upsc made this type ..and continue 1:15
ಗ್ರೇಸ್ ಮಾರ್ಕ್ಸ್ ಜೊತೆಗೆ ರೇಶಿಯೋ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ಆಗಬೇಕು,, ಇಲ್ಲ re exam ಆಗಬೇಕು sir
Correct ❤
yes sir kpsc has to cancel this exam and do re notification ... and as you said they have to do exam within 9 months with no other mistakes by kpsc and give result as early as possible ... well analysis sir .
Very well said👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻
Excellent analysis.
💯 ✅️ solution sir 👌
Kas ಮರು ಪರೀಕ್ಷೆ ಆಗಬೇಕು...
Best solution 👌
Kas re exam agabeku
Grace marks is the best option, it solves the matter upto some extent . otherwise it hampers the exam process.
Everyone will get the grace. it won't b the solution
Everyone has to write reexam again, is dat better solution????
Good analysis sir...how can we reach out to you...contact details sir
Can watsapp on 8867769192
Ratio need to increase sor
Good solution but court alli case nadsodu its not easy it needs lots of money 😢😢😢and no one will do it for free😢😢😢
👏👏👏
Re exam agbeku
Re exam sir
Kannada matado maraya ಬಿಜಾಪುರ ಅಂತೀಯಾ
Will make video in kannada. Thanks
LINK OF KANNADA VIDIO FOR THE SAME. th-cam.com/video/YQobRXEA900/w-d-xo.html
Goodluck bro