Explain non-disclosure of forest guard exam marks: HC to GSSSB

Ahmedabad: The Gujarat high court has sought an explanation from the Gujarat Subordinate Services Selection Board (GSSSB) for not disclosing the marks of the candidates on the merit list prepared for the recruitment of forest guards.
The HC issued notices to the state govt, GSSSB and Tata Consultancy Services Ltd after 108 candidates, who participated in the recruitment process, challenged the selection process.Over 7 lakh candidates applied for the test conducted for the recruitment of 813 positions of forest guard.
After the merit list was declared, the unsuccessful candidates approached the HC through advocates Vikram Thakor and Bhushan Oza, raising questions about the propriety of the recruitment process.
They objected to the board's last-minute decision to change the mode of examination from OMR to computer-based recruitment test (CBRT). They also pointed out that the board did not mention the marks obtained by the candidates who were selected.
After hearing the submissions, Justice Nirzar Desai stated that non-disclosure of the marks obtained by the candidates who qualified would raise questions regarding the transparency of the recruitment process.
The court sought an explanation in this regard, stating: "The respondents are directed to file an affidavit, justifying their action of not disclosing the marks of each of the qualified candidates against their names, while preparing the selection list by way of CBRT. Further, considering the fact that non-disclosure of the marks, against the name of each qualified candidate, has given rise to the speculations that the exam was not conducted properly, it shall be further clarified that as to whether the non-disclosure of marks against the name of each qualified candidate was done under any policy decision taken by the authorities. If the same was done under a policy decision, then the details of the same be placed on record with the affidavit by the next date of hearing."
The court has scheduled the next hearing of the matter for Dec 12 and clarified that if the authorities do not file the affidavit by then, the court would view it very seriously, "and the same may result in serious consequences".