PGET row: Karnataka high court asks CID to give report by Aug 21
The high court on Thursday directed the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) to hold a fresh enquiry into the malpractices in the post-graduate entrance test (PGET) for medical courses. It also directed Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences (RGUHS) to conduct fresh counselling for all eligible PGET candidates in the case questioning the state government’s move to nullify 11 toppers for alleged malpractices in the post-graduate medical entrance exam.
The CID has been asked to submit its report by August 21.
It may be recalled that Vinod Karjgi, Haridattatreya Mantagni, Dhananjay and other toppers had filed a petition in the high court. They had questioned the deletion of their names from the merit list without giving them an opportunity for hearing. They said that this move was illegal and at least a notice should have been given to them. Hence, the petitioners sought for permission to attend the counselling.
Justice BS Patil directed that a fresh enquiry into the PGET be conducted by the CID, by an officer not below the rank of inspector general of police.
The judge also said that the 11 toppers whose ranks were annulled can undergo counselling and the admission process.
However, their results will be subject to the investigation by the CID, and the final orders passed by this court.
Justice Patil observed that both Lokayukta’s and the committee’s reports do not indict that the11 toppers were involved in the malpractices.
The judge further observed that it is painful to know that only a half- hearted effort has been made to arrive at the truth of the matter. He observed thatno systematic in-depth investigation was conducted to burst the racket alleged in the conduct of the PGET.If such allegations are not thoroughly investigated, it will continue to prelude the process of determination of the merit of the candidate and admissions to the PGET.
The judge further observed that mere suspicion cannot take the place of the truth when it comes to a serious thing such as annulling of results. The nature of suspicion is also such that it is based on certain circumstances such as alleged inappropriate seating arrangement, mobile calls, common wrong answers,video graph recordings, and some toppers not answering the questions for an hour. None of these circumstances can be taken either individually or collectively as sufficient material to inflict penalty of the annulment of results, he said.
If at all such serious allegations of involvement of investigators and heads of institutions of colleges are true, the mater then requires systematic investigation by an expert agency.
DNA
The CID has been asked to submit its report by August 21.
It may be recalled that Vinod Karjgi, Haridattatreya Mantagni, Dhananjay and other toppers had filed a petition in the high court. They had questioned the deletion of their names from the merit list without giving them an opportunity for hearing. They said that this move was illegal and at least a notice should have been given to them. Hence, the petitioners sought for permission to attend the counselling.
Justice BS Patil directed that a fresh enquiry into the PGET be conducted by the CID, by an officer not below the rank of inspector general of police.
The judge also said that the 11 toppers whose ranks were annulled can undergo counselling and the admission process.
However, their results will be subject to the investigation by the CID, and the final orders passed by this court.
Justice Patil observed that both Lokayukta’s and the committee’s reports do not indict that the11 toppers were involved in the malpractices.
The judge further observed that it is painful to know that only a half- hearted effort has been made to arrive at the truth of the matter. He observed thatno systematic in-depth investigation was conducted to burst the racket alleged in the conduct of the PGET.If such allegations are not thoroughly investigated, it will continue to prelude the process of determination of the merit of the candidate and admissions to the PGET.
The judge further observed that mere suspicion cannot take the place of the truth when it comes to a serious thing such as annulling of results. The nature of suspicion is also such that it is based on certain circumstances such as alleged inappropriate seating arrangement, mobile calls, common wrong answers,video graph recordings, and some toppers not answering the questions for an hour. None of these circumstances can be taken either individually or collectively as sufficient material to inflict penalty of the annulment of results, he said.
If at all such serious allegations of involvement of investigators and heads of institutions of colleges are true, the mater then requires systematic investigation by an expert agency.
DNA
Comments
Post a Comment