Advertisements

APPSC G1 Mains Forum

Please continue the discussions of Interview candidates here, after SC Judgement, As previous page & forum has reached high number of comments which makes page navigation difficult.

(Discussions Continued in this link)

Advertisements

821 comments:

1 – 200 of 821   Newer›   Newest»
Saidul Naik said...

I think conducted Group 1 Mains cannot be cancelled technically, but where from your are strongly arguing that SC is cancelling the mains, plz give source

Saidul Naik said...

I will continue to discuss here, till the chat box issue is resolved

chaitanya ch said...

yes we are confused by this news.. the SLP is to vacate the interim order so the SC has to either vacate it or continue it right? how come they will raise the issue of reconducting wen already HC directed to appoint a committee??

Anonymous said...

i agree with chaitanya..can SC pass the final judgement now ??? coz they dont hav the committee report !! i think they just raised this argument whether to vacate the stay or not... in any case , vacating the stay at this juncture means striking down the case coz its the last stage of notification. filing SLP is not a proper move by APPSC , they shud hav appealed the judgement of HC in SC...correct me if i am wrong..

chaitanya ch said...

Dont know abt the technicalities but there is a panic all around. But i heard there are similar cases in TN and haryana where the judgement is in favour of PSC so why is it against ours now?? any idea?

Saidul Naik said...

As per judgement of HC, they will wait for Committee report specifically i think

chaitanya ch said...

what does vacating the stay implies? they will give out the results right? if not then they will wait for committe report. is it how it goes?

Saidul Naik said...

If vacated, result will be out only if SC vacates, but already HC is waiting for report from UPSC committee now, so HC technically wont allow results to come out till the report comes

Saidul Naik said...

Users can post with Anonymous (if they dont want to reveal their id)

Anonymous said...

some body told that yesterday it self upsc gave report.

chaitanya ch said...

Naik but the SC has stayed upsc report earlier.here it goes.


By way of an interim order we direct that the report
from the Union Public Service Commission, as directed by the High
Court, may not be called for in the meantime.
In SLP(C)No. 25209/2013

Anonymous said...

chaitanya..is tht judgement regarding our current case ??? if they r not asking for UPSC report , then on wht basis they decide the fate of the case ?? entire case is based on those questions r right or wrong ..so court does not hav time or technical knowledge to verify the questions..they either hav to call appsc committee report or ask for upsc report..now what appsc is thinking tht somehow get the stay vacated in SC and then release the results..but once the results r out and postings r given , then nothing can be done..SC knows this well..even if they vacate the stay , they will order the appsc not to give postings..so wht benefit students get ??? nothing...

anyone who is in direct touch with the lawyer , plz update here..

Anonymous said...

No newspaper posted news about APPSC Group 1 mains case today, whats happening????

Anonymous said...

ITEM NO.54 COURT NO.11 SECTION XIIA

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).25157/2013

(From the judgement and order dated 26/07/2013 in WP No.2392/2013 of the
HIGH COURT OF A.P. AT HYDERABAD)

ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

K PRASAD AND ANR. Respondent(s)

(With appln(s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and
with prayer for interim relief)

WITH

SLP(C) NO. 25209 of 2013
(With appln(s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and
with prayer for interim relief and office report)


Date:16/08/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.


CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. GOKHALE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR



For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shyam Divan,Sr.Adv.
Mrs. Anjani Aiyagari,Adv.
Mr. G. Vivekanand,Adv.

Mr. Vinod A. Bobde,Sr.Adv.
Mr. G. Vivekanand,Adv.
Mrs. Anjani Aiyagari,Adv.


For Respondent(s) Mr. H.S. Gururaja Rao,Sr.Adv.
Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar,Adv.
Ms. Bina Madhavan,Adv.
Ms. Praseena E. Joseph,Adv.
Mr. Shivendra Singh,Adv.
for M/S. Lawyer'S Knit & Co.,Advs.

Mr. G.N. Reddy,Adv.
Mr. B. Debojit,Adv.
Mr. Bala Shivudu M.,Adv.




UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R


The matters are adjourned for one week.




(A.S. BISHT) (SNEH LATA SHARMA)
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

Anonymous said...

Let us gather at Bashirbagh press club tomorrow at 10am, sunday to chalk out serious future action plan on g1 results.carray mains hallticket n interview call letter.

Anonymous said...

will mains be get cancelled???

Anonymous said...

Appsc is raedy to give new notifications ,but govt is not willing to give permission to Appsc

Anonymous said...

yes it is related to current case.
why will they order appsc not to give postings?? i dint understand u mean still there will be a case even after results are out?

Anonymous said...

no chance of cancellation, previous judgements were all in favor of appsc, even this will be dont worry

Anonymous said...

iam unable to attend meeting tomorrow but i promise that i will get involved in every step and action u are going to decide tomorrow

Anonymous said...

i heard that judge is in favour of cancelling the mains...is dis news right???

Anonymous said...

no brother...its the last stage of notifcation...results will be published only after solving all the cases..i do not know abt postings. coz its another hurdle to cross..so SC may give relief to appsc that they may publish the ranks but dont give call letters until the cases r solved...but this argument doesnt even impress me..so i dont think thts possible..results will be out only after the SC judgement. only lawyer can tell us whts the environment inside the court...

Anonymous said...

some one called me and told to contribute money to appoint lawyer.
But how can we put our view in middle of proceedings, we have to wait till the judgement and then only we can put a petition, right?

Anonymous said...

can u share the contact number of the person who called regarding the appointment of lawyer

Anonymous said...

Plz call Mr.MUNNA (9550504189) regarding lawyer. This is a SERIOUS issue. APPSC has left us at our own fate...

Anonymous said...

frnds nenu evala meeting attend ayyanu.mana frnds manakosam chala poradutunnaru frnds. ela blog lo unnantha coooooooooooool ga situation ledu frnds.pls vak up.cooperate vid our frnds pls contribute some ammount pf money.meru teliyani vallaki ela veyalani badapadalsina avasaram ledu.they r all authanticated persons.pls frnds dis s my humble request.thank u.

Anonymous said...

munna sir u r really avsm sir.mana system ki melanti varu kavali sir .keeeeeeeeeeep it sir.

anonymous said...

super annaya

anonymous said...

technically we cannot enter the case at this stage as u cannot implede on an SLP..... i do not know why some respondents are causing fear.... all will be well.... i know the meeting was attended by around 125 ppl. but it is all a fear.....please wait for judgement of SC... it will direct HC what to do.... there is no question of impleading as a 3rd party in the above case.... at the worst case matter wil be directed to SAT with technical advise of CAT or guidance....

Anonymous said...

chellamma

Anonymous said...

don't discourage sir/mam

Anonymous said...

So do you think people are collecting money without knowing that they cannot plead as third party?

Anonymous said...

i hope mains wont get cancelled,enduknatey manalo chala mandhiki ah 6 questions valana marks add avuthayi,cut off inka peruguthundhi tappa,manaku emi kadhu,then why mains should be cancelled.??i hope it is just a rumour..yes only 303 candidates will be selected..even if im not there ,i just hope others get benifit..already new notification pedning lo undhi..asala two candidates nijanga ah 6 questions ki marks vesthey qualify avuthara.....god only knows

Anonymous said...

i like ur attitude ..but u shud appreciate those 2 candidates too.. bcoz of them , mistakes in the key came to light and showed how careless appsc is .. and when they cud modify some questions and updated the prelims list again , why appsc cud not do in other 3-4 questions..if they had done that , now evryone wud be happy.. they r just fighting for the justice. let them..
cancelling mains is bit extreme..i dont think tht will happen..lets see wht happens..

Anonymous said...

I think lots of arguments will take place before sc.

suppose if we consider that 6 questions are deleted, then hardly less than thousand members will be in and the same will be out in prelimary list, but what about the 14000 candidates who wrote mains. that means more than 90% will be again in the mains list.
as already mains and interviews are over,
that means justice to be given either in favour of 90% or in favour of 10%.

Anonymous said...

why the case hearing is postponed to 7/10/13. Any Idea

Anonymous said...

Ya, checked case status just now, listing date is 07.10.13.

Anonymous said...

october 7th ??? in supreme court ??? whts happening ???

Anonymous said...

Why is it changed to oct 7th now, anybody has any idea??

Anonymous said...

someone who is in contact with lawyers , plz update the status..october 7th is tooooo long.. :(

Anonymous said...

wat the hell is happening with this case? oct 7th seriously??? please clear the case soon so that we can move on .. we cant hang on like this for years together..

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know why it got postponed??

Anonymous said...

whats in this case to make it postponed to 7th october?????

Anonymous said...

It got adjourned for a week and may be that is the nearest date available in SC

Anonymous said...

Guys...cool...the case is postponed to 23/08/2013

Anonymous said...

Case numbers 25157/2013,25209/2013...
if u have any doubts plz chek supreme court website

Anonymous said...

no its still showing 07/10/2013. let me know where you have seen it:

Status of : Special Leave Petition (Civil) 25157 Of 2013

ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION .Vs. K PRASAD AND ANR.

Pet. Adv. : MRS. ANJANI AIYAGARI

Subject Category : SERVICE MATTERS - RECRUITMENT/TRANSFER/COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT


Listed 1 times earlier Next Date of listing is : 07/10/2013

Anonymous said...

where u have seen boss.

reddy said...

ITEM NO.54 COURT NO.11 SECTION XIIA

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).25157/2013

(From the judgement and order dated 26/07/2013 in WP No.2392/2013 of the
HIGH COURT OF A.P. AT HYDERABAD)

ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

K PRASAD AND ANR. Respondent(s)

(With appln(s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and
with prayer for interim relief)

WITH

SLP(C) NO. 25209 of 2013
(With appln(s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and
with prayer for interim relief and office report)


Date:16/08/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.


CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. GOKHALE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR



For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shyam Divan,Sr.Adv.
Mrs. Anjani Aiyagari,Adv.
Mr. G. Vivekanand,Adv.

Mr. Vinod A. Bobde,Sr.Adv.
Mr. G. Vivekanand,Adv.
Mrs. Anjani Aiyagari,Adv.


For Respondent(s) Mr. H.S. Gururaja Rao,Sr.Adv.
Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar,Adv.
Ms. Bina Madhavan,Adv.
Ms. Praseena E. Joseph,Adv.
Mr. Shivendra Singh,Adv.
for M/S. Lawyer'S Knit & Co.,Advs.

Mr. G.N. Reddy,Adv.
Mr. B. Debojit,Adv.
Mr. Bala Shivudu M.,Adv.




UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R


The matters are adjourned for one week.




(A.S. BISHT) (SNEH LATA SHARMA)
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

Anonymous said...

dear reddy what you have given is correct. but in the causelist of 23/8/2013 this case is not listed.In status what i have uploaded is the date of listing. kindly once again look at the site of supreme court

Anonymous said...

see todays eenadu..they covered the case in detail..next hearing in october..and SC asked whether appsc can consider re conducting mains again ..i hav one doubt...if appsc agrees to conduct again , will it be only for new candidates or for all ??? its a big mess now !!!

Anonymous said...

lakshya ias lo governor ni meet avuthunnaru ani undhi....what is the future course of action ,please let us know.

case is postponed to october 7th,its very dissapointing..oka compettitive exams ki two mains ela conduct chestharu ...??

606 mandhi fools ayyamaaa

Anonymous said...

may be they r meeting for new notifications... wht can governor do whn the case is in supreme court ???

not only 606 students..all aspirants who wrote prelims became fools now...

Anonymous said...

how can they conduct 2 mains for one exam ??? is it legally possible ???

i think appsc must hav caluculated the changes in new key and its impact (how many interview ppl or mains failed ppl go out + how many new ppl come in ).. if they realise that none of the 606 ppl is going out bcoz of these 6 questions , they wud hav told this matter in HC already..

its really confusing ...eenadu mentioned tht there is no need for UPSC report...so how will they decide the case now ?? has SC agreed with the aspirants view tht appsc shud conduct mains again ?

@hari12345 , sankar..plz update whts happening really ?? whts the lawyer saying ?

Anonymous said...

sankar garu please update ,assalu e case ela U turn teesukuntundhani anukoledhu...mains malli antey adhi inka jaragadhu...already state division godavallo untey that is impossible

ajit said...

anything some mistakes in prelims key this is correct. present mains canceled and realsed fresh key and conduct mains again as possible early , any delay may be divided state some rules are changed . bcz appsc maybe taken early.

ajit said...

no useful meet to governor. at present ball in appsc court. this issue depend on appsc decision.

Anonymous said...

pls read today eenadu newspaper main, its content abt appsc g1 exam, supreme court asked the appsc to conduct a mains exam rather then key review upsc... the appsc replied that its not posssible to conduct a mains again because turmoil situation in the state and interviews also conducted.... appsc asked sc to give permission to annouce results..... sc refused to do sooooo ......

Anonymous said...

they conducted the interviews after getting stay order from HC..so SC wont entertain this argument... but in eenadu its mentioned tht thr is no need for UPSC review of the key.. and will SC care abt the turmoil in the state ??? it can pass orders to the DGP to provide security to the exam.. so both arguments doesnt stand in supreme court..

all SC cares abt is whether any questions were wrong ?? and if yes , they will direct the appsc to update the key and conduct mains again..whether appsc can conduct the exam or not , its upto the commission... will appsc cancel the notification altogether as state is getting divided ??? can it do like tht ??? i heard somewhr tht punjab psc cancelled notification during division...is it true ??

ultimately we r the losers bcoz of appsc carelessness..

Anonymous said...

is it sure there is going to be no hearing this friday in supreme court?

Anonymous said...

In tamilnadu PSC case some 5 years back, SC gave judgement in favor of interviewed candidates in the same situation like what we are seeing in APPSC case here.in that case - in prelims some 20 questions were wrong. in this case they are around 10(app).Eventhen if SC decides to revise key, its good if they conduct re mians to those new entrants in to mains qualified list. why every one need to write again. normalization of old and new mains marks can be taken care of SC or any of its committee appointed.

Anonymous said...

yehh..it can be done..normalisation for 5 papers is not an easy task.. its difficult because appsc has 600 ppl marks on one hand..and lets say 200 ppl newly qualified..how can u compare the averages of 600 and 200 ??? its veryy complex and i dont think appsc has tht much expertise to take care of tht..bloody hell they cant even prepare questions for prelims exam..can we trust their normalisation procedure ??? again those new guys will reach the court to reveal the normalisation procedure...

in this situation , i dont think appsc can re conduct mains..it will argue in SC to strike down the case...otherwise it will come back and stricke down the entire notification itself and leave it to the new states to conduct recruitment..lets hope this does not happen...

Anonymous said...

thats why i said Honorable SC shall appoint a committee for normalizing new entrant's mains marks with already written candidates marks. i think APPSC need not do that normalization task. That normalization can be transparent process too. why all 50*312 candidates need to write mains again? there will be lot of wastage in terms of resources like paper, man power, man hours etc. As there are only 2 or 3 questions that have ambiguous answers(really they are not absolutely wrong also) either this case can be closed by giving a warning that this kind of mistakes in future should not be repeated or if SC wants to revise key, in my opinion its correct to conduct mains for new entrants only and this whole process incl interviews can be completed in probably 6 weeks it self.

Anonymous said...

even if they stike down new notification, there may be cases on APPSC in the same SC. I think Honorable SC to close this case without any remains with a warning to APPSC to not repeat the mistakes in future exams. other wise there is no dearth of cases to file.

Anonymous said...

giving warning to appsc will solve the case ????? then all problems in this country can be solved like tht...

the case is abt injustice to those candidates who cud not attend mains bcoz of wrong key .. they might hav cleared mains and attended interview if given chance !!!

ur suggestion abt normalisation is gud...but i dont think appsc will agree for conducting mains again... even if it conducts , it wont raise the normalisation issue..it will be raised by the candidates again...as u said , again no. of cases ..

if SC orders appsc to conduct mains again , then the only logical solution is to update the key and conduct mains again.. then no cases..if not again cases...

i think appsc has freedom to strike down the notification in extraordinary situations....it can do anything if SC doesnt object,,

Anonymous said...

Of course warning/reprimanding APPSC or any PSC in extraordinary situations!! SC can do that (i think)!!!!!.

Mistakes are not rarest of rare crimes!!!!! unless they are fatal!!!!

There is injustice in making all the candidates to write mains again incl. already interviewed candidates too.None of then were part of the so called injustice to other candidates who are not in the list because of so called "wrong answers".

Even that so called injustice is not willingly done by APPSC it seems.At the time of first revision of key APPSC might be thinking they have enough data on gross level that those 6 questions are right!!!!they may be confident about their data.

Think honorable SC has enough knowledge about equal rights of the candidates who already wrote and got to the interview stage.

It seems its logical to close this case or list new mains candidates and let them only write re mains. Normalization as some body said is not such a tough task when we look at the human/technical resources available to honorable SC at their disposal.

As the other person told "there's lot of resource wastage if once again mains are conducted"

Anonymous said...

Warnings/Reprimanding to constitutional bodies by Honorable SC for mistakes is equivalent to conviction.

Don't under estimate word "Warning/reprimanding" by such an high authority as it has many repercussions.

Kindly don't compare with other ordinary or criminal cases. In this case a constitutional body(APPSC) is involved apart from Honorable SC( who is going to give verdict).

if at all conducting re mains is finalized, its better that its for people who are newly qualified to mains, no need for all.

Anonymous said...

wastage of resources ?? time is more imp resource than papers and money...and we lost 1 yr bcoz of some silly mistakes by appsc..

anyways i still think the matter wont reach that stage.. since interviews are already conducted , somehow SC will be linient towards appsc.but ofcourse it depends on the opposite lawyers also..how effectively they argue the case...

i think some candidates who cudnt clear mains contributed financially to the case hoping for a 2nd chance...nothing wrong with tht..so the lawyer will be demanding fresh mains again...

if appsc mistakes r proved in SC , then i think it will be the only option SC has.. coz thr r many complications...letme explain.. acc. to the new key, lets say 100 members r added in and 100 members r thrown out..(out of outgoing 100 , 50 given interview..)..so interview candidates are now 550.. to get 1 : 2 ratio , they hav to take 50 candidates out of 100. (i.e they hav 50% chances to attend interview..) while the failed candidates fought from 1:50 to 1 :2 ratio...how will u justify this ??? whr is the justice for the failed candidates ?

SC is well aware of these complications.....we'll get to know evrything by october only...until then , we hav to keep guessing...


Anonymous said...

You or who ever have lost 1 year because of wrong key by APPSC, that's why it' being said that only those new entrants to mains list need to write the mains again. why every other who already wrote mains should again be given chance. they were already given chance once! why once again.it's not euqal to let others also write mains once again. only new entrants need to write if at all case goes to that extent.

if some body given money to write mains again, seems illogical and kind of crime to manipulate system in spite of knowing that its crime to ask for re mains, in spite of having a chance already.

Kindly don't excuse wrong doings just like that. If its wrong by APPSC to not give correct key, it's equally wrong that using money power and fight for re mains in spite of writing and not clearing mains once. what kind of justice are these people fighting for. It looks in the name of re mains lot of money circulation is going on. Had they asked for re mains to new candidates who lost opportunity because of so called "Mistakes" by APPSC, it could have been reasonable and correct. Do you think Honorable Supreme Court doesn't know about justice in-spite of working for all these years!!!!!.

If they have that much money the same can be used to any orphanage, education to downtrodden, etc. there are 100s of options to do good things.

How can you say that around 50 interviewed candidates out of 606. what if hardly 3-4 interviewed candidates are out and there are around 150 - 200 new entrants in the revised mains list!. Isn't that ratio normal to what is generally done.

Don't misguide by giving figures which are of interest to you. Above ratio also seems logical!!! isn't it?!! how do you know that they are around 50 people from interviewed candidates are out of the list if at all the list is revised. If you know that much about new list, could you please let us know whether the candidates who have filed the case shall be there in the new list or not?!!.

if UPSC can normalize civils mains score(as what is generally told in civils coaching circles) between subjects which have no relation at all, do you think they can't normalize score of new and old mains of Group 1 where subjects/topics and much of gist in subject wont change drastically in a year or half?

one more thing to say, had there been no case and results were out for the so called "interviewed candidates". I am sure by this time APPSC would have released new notification, conducted prelims and probably mains qualified list also could have been prepared. These people who paid money for re mains could be writing mains with out that money payments (had they cleared new prelims without money power):) .

Anonymous said...

first of all..i just said thr MIGHT hav some candidates funded for re mains...they r not lobbying with politicians yaar...its the court..it will decide who is correct..so even if they fund money , its not sure tht court will tilt towards them..u shud know tht... whts wrong with going to court ??? they shud not even go to court ???

yehh...thr might be just 10 interview candidates who will be out of the list bcoz of updated key...nobody knows..i just guessed...dont take my numbers seriously... wht i tried to say is. as u said , lets say only 5 interviewed ppl r out...that means those 100 new ppl r writing mains for those 5 positions.. so , their fighting chance is 1 : 20 while failed candidates fought 1 : 50 ..i agree they had a chance..but why give undue chance to few ppl newly now ?? even they had right on those 314 posts...

if not even 1 person is out of interviewed list , then whts the use of conducting re-mains again for some 100 candidates ???

kindly note the ratio is just for explaining...whtever official figures , it wont giv them 1 : 50 chance right ??

plz dont compare upsc with appsc..when they cant even give correct key for prelims exam , how can we trust in complex normalisation procedure by appsc ??? again RTIs and cases ...

i dont understand why u blame ppl fighting the cases ...for cases , money can be contributed by anyone...is thr any rule tht failed candidates shud not contribute ?? so dont judge ppl by their failure in prelims..and their failure is bcoz of careless appsc..so why shudnt they fight ???

and bhai...clearing prelims with money power ??? if u think tht contributing money for case is bribing , then u shud think again with peaceful mind...

regarding new notification , it doesnt matter...atleast bcoz of them , appsc will be careful in keys from now on..otherwise , next notification u and me wud hav been victims in prelims.. wont u fight against it at tht time ???

so chill...it doesnt matter wht we argue in this forum..it wont affect the judgement...i am not party to the case...so dont take ur anger on my comments on those ppl fighting for the case...

i suggest u shud go to appsc and question them rather than blaming the aspirants who r fighting..that alone will solve the matter..

Anonymous said...

Dear bhai, i am also not a party in this case. Why I am participating in this saga of messages and replies is because - quite many are repeating the same "cancel already conducted mains and re conduct mains again". Doesn't it smell fishy! I am really sorry if you are not able smell rot in this issue. Had petitioners or bloggers told said statements like "re mains for new guys and subsequent interviews", i wouldn't have messaged at all? Isn't it injustice to candidates already went to the stage of interview.Every body is talking about opportunity lost to guys with wrong key. Why don't any body talk about those 600+ who went to interview if mains are cancelled? They too didn't do any thing wrong to write mains again. Their time is also valuable.

There could be many number of cases even if your logic of supporting re mains is accepted. There is no end. If we think microscopically every thing can be questioned again and again, case never ends which hinders opportunity for both present and future aspirants. Isn't there injustice!
Kindly dont say what ever your views are correct and justice to be done on the same. There are quite many tangles in this case. We don’t know about number of candidates coming in the new list and how many moving out from existing list. Let us not discuss on that topic, otherwise I can use numbers which are helpful for my statements and you for yours. Hope that point shall be taken care by SC. If some mistake is happened by APPSC doesn't mean that what ever they do is wrong. Normalisation of new and old marks can be taken care by committee appointed by SC also. Whats the big deal in that.
I am not blaming people for filing/fighting any cases. Kindly look at my previous statments for which you have answered. My only question is why new mains to all for the sake of say 200 - 300 new entrants. New mains could be for them only is enough in my view. Many times i see a message of re mains!!!why? that is my question. I didn't blamed any body. Any how as you said discussion in blog doesn't change situation much, but views should not be one sided as if some thing like grave injustice is being done to few people only and others are happy in doing the so called “injustice”.what i expect is some body should think why points like re mains are being popularised and as you said some body is collecting money saying this.
After looking at the statement” i think some candidates who cudnt clear mains contributed financially to the case hoping for a 2nd chance...nothing wrong with tht..so the lawyer will be demanding fresh mains again...”. I commented on money issue.
How can you say “nothing wrong in that”, if that is so, APPSC doing so called “injustice” is also not wrong? Isn’t it? Had money being collected (As you said) saying financing is necessary to revise list and let re mains to new candidates, which is genuine as per few aspirants I couldn’t have ridiculed about people your are fighting for. Collecting money in the name of re mains for all is also injustice.

Hope you and your friends for who you are quarreling need to go APPSC regarding the same.


Honourable SC has enough knowledge of what is what. Hope justice is done to all.

Anonymous said...

arey anna,

Kindly once again go through what i have written, dont say things what i have not commented. i never commented about not going to courts. what i questioned is why re mains issue is being raised un necessarily and whats point in collecting/financing case with intention to re mains for all rather than to new people entering the list. Thats what iam questioning. what iam saying is SC can think of normalisation of mains marks between new and old lists with a committee or with help of UPSC. whats the point in again raising APPSC cant do it?

i think no body needs your or my suggestions to go to APPSC or courts.

Anonymous said...

Lets stop scolding each other guys.Someone in contact with lawyer plz update.Otherwise rumours like this will float on.EENADU clearly mentioned that appsc doesnt like to conduct mains again. So they will do something regarding this.Its a matter of shame for appsc if they conduct mains again.

dont know when the case will end. lets hope Supreme court gives final hearing in october itself, whatever be the judgement. unnecessary waste of time.

I lost hope on appsc now. no more new notifications :(

Anonymous said...

Hey guys! y r u wasting ur time? Keep urself preparing for next recruitment or just leave it... Someone here said that nothing can be done after the postings are given. That's not true boss...In a particular case with RRB, several hundreds of employees were removed even after having worked for more than 8 yrs. So, let the case go on. At last, those guys are fighting for our own sake only. You should be proud of them bcoz they are the ones who initiated reforms in appsc such as the publication of answer keys etc... Isn't it? So, let's wish gud luck to them. All the best!

Anonymous said...

This is not the issue of only those two persons. It's the question of transparency and fairness on the part of APPSC. For how many years, would you like to suffer just because of the mal/ill practices of APPSC?? Our seniors had sufferred, no we are suffering? somebody somewhere is trying to put an end to this...If you don't support, it's up to you. But don't discourage them. Who knows, tomorrow you might be in their position...Think over it, bhai.

Anonymous said...

I feel sorry to say this. But guys like you have made APPSC to continue with its ill practices. What made you think that SC would be lenient towards PSC. Just go through previous SC judgments and then only come on to the desk, little boy!!! Can u tell me something? Why do you stick on to 91 as the cutoff as if it is an academic cutoff? You just ignored that marks list of all the candidates alone would validate this cut-off. Instead of guessing and wasting ur time, better join a private job like me....

Anonymous said...

i heard thereis a final hearing in supreme court regarding group1 exams

Anonymous said...

Hi guys! Everyone is talking about re-mains, injustice, wastage of paper,time etc. Had anyone thought about those who have been facing this struggle since one year? Had anyone thought of publication of answer key by APPSC. Just ask your friends who have recently cleared their exams just because of pubication of key and revising the key. You guys are talking all bull shit with regard to case status, funding etc.

Have you ever thought how much have those 5 people spent in terms of money, time, pain, tears on this case, only with a fond hope of justice? Have you ever thought how they brought this case from tribunal to SC? I'm not in favour of them too. They are fools just because they thought that at least people will support them, if not God! Hv u ever thought y the markslist hasn't been published, as was done in previous exam? You simply believe dat da cut-ff is 91 just bcoz PSC has said so. Isn't it? Think..think..guys!

You guys are talking about your own chances of clearing mains and pursuing posts. But think about those who have been the victims of the APPSC in the past. Many guys are talking abt new notifications. Can anyone firmly say that he/she is going to be a Gr-1 officer in future, if the same system continues with APPSC? I also did in the interview well but just can't be so selfish.

Someone somewhere is trying to change the system once and for all. If not support them, let's just not demean them...I don't understand one simple thing. Are you guys paid for posting on this site? If not, then y r u wasting ur time, as if it is FB. The case is b/w the victims and the PSC. Then y shud we all poke into this matter. Let's hope for the best. That's all...

Anonymous said...

well said bro...if there is no case we all wud have written another prelims in june itself. Now see the consequences!! we have no hope of a notification in near future.Remember one thing guys no law in this world will guarantee justice and equality to each and every person. if we go by that rule then there will be more no of cases than the population.so SC will weigh both the implications and complications and then will pass the judgement which shud also be a benchmark for such future cases.As far as teaching a lesson to APPSC is concerned please dont bother about that and waste ur time guys.It functions under diff heads and under diff govt so even if u teach a lesson now u may have to do that again after 2-3yrs

Anonymous said...

i think new notification did not depend on this result..2011 notification was issued in DECEMBER even before the interviews of prev noti wereconducted,.. this delay is bcoz of calendar issue..othrwise by this time prelims wud hav been over :(

Anonymous said...

Even the guys who have cleared mains and attended interviews have "spent in terms of money, time, pain, tears on this case, only with a fond hope of justice" you can't say out rightly that their efforts are worthless or they should not try at all. You know none of us are part of the so called "injustice". Those 5 guys have their point and APPSC has its point. Why don't people think that, why APPSC has not taken those 6 questions in to considerations at that time itself along with other questions based on which it has revised key, if they are so adamant they couldn't have revised key at all. Probably they might have thought they had proof to prove that their answers are correct. Let them fight their case like of those 5.We can’t judge who is right by sitting before computers and with part/paltry information.

You too don't talk bullshit about this case unnecessarily. Other party may also see your points as the same "bull shit" like thier's are to you.

It has become fashion to comment system and claim them selves as "crusaders of change". If some body who have other views than their's, they are branded as if they are "enemy of state". No body if iam right here have said that those 5 should have tried for a court battle with APPSC,am i right? hope so!. Then what is the point in showing and commenting bloggers who have other views and arguments than that of ours.Every body have views, and have right to express like you are expressing.They should not be out rightly striked down unless they are absurd.

No system in the world is perfect whether it is political or non political. Every thing got its advantage and disadvantage. Wise people long back in our country have selected few systems which are with less defects compared to others. They have not stopped there, even now they are trying to improve them with things like RTI, Citizen charter etc. You can’t out rightly comment on change in system with in a jiffy without any detailed alternatives. If have any kindly take them or it to notice of respective personnel who can introduce them, we all shall be very happy to be under that kind of 100% correct system or else try to improve the existing one with an un biased mindset.

We will be very happy to see the faulty systems changed. But in that saga of efforts you need to be ready to face opposite opinions or status quo opinions. if you have correct answers give them or consider others views for change in your stand. its not correct to comment others un necessarily.

No body is demeaning others, every body is explaining their points. Those can’t be condemned just because they are not of your view. There is a saying in telugu " pacha kamerla rogi ki.......", your comments are similar to that about being paid for posting in this blog. You might have earned money by postings biased views in FB in favour of some body earlier. May be you wanted to try same here, but after looking at other views which are not in line with yours or your sponsors may be you are afraid that "your payments may come down by your sponsors" as some people are posting comments which are not in line with yours. Hope you too not poke in to the issue which is between PSC and so called "Victims".

Anonymous said...

Continued

We are really not aware of how they have brought their case from tribunal to SC, kindly explain us. It may make some of "enemy of state" to change their views.

"guys who are talking about your own chances of clearing mains and pursuing posts" have not manipulated/influenced system to reach that stage and they have every right to be eager for results or for postings if they are in the final list. They were no way related to so called "injustice". There is no point in questioning their efforts/eagerness for or to know results and terming them as if they are doing a crime.

Before commenting keep your mind with peace and start typing your comments keeping both parties in view. Both have them have thier points otherwise they could not be court battle to this extent.

If you think that you are not selfish, you could have not attended interview and fought along with those 5, then proclaimed your self as eternal soul with out selfish elements in you. With out doing this you cant keep on mud sledging on other parties efforts for their search of justice.

Any ways - Let hope justice is done to all to the extent possible as there are much informed persons are dealing with these things

Anonymous said...

No body if iam right here have said that those 5 should have tried for a court battle with APPSC,am i right?

read above statement as

"No body, if iam right, here, have said that those 5 should not have tried for a court battle with APPSC,am i right?

Anonymous said...

@hari12345 or sankar bhai..r u thr ?? this debate wont stop until u comeout with facts... be cool guys..better prepare for someother exam if u r not fighting the case..if judgement comes in ur favour , celebrate ..otherwise go ahead with ur preparation...why waste time by waiting for appsc to do something ?

Anonymous said...

Its not about whether some body wins or lose the case. Finally justice prevails.

There could be restraint by few while commenting on others views. Paid, bullshit, time waste, etc shows who is demeaning who!

None till now has commented/condemned move by those 5 on their journey to justice(as per their or your version). At the same time we need to look at the other part of the story or view related to that other part.One should be ready to atleast hear what others are saying. They may also have their version of answers, Instead what is happening is, opposite views to those 5 are being commented or branded as if they are traitors to nation or some thing similar to that.This kind of mud throwing is not a good practise, which is making this un necessary debate to prolong.

Like you said already my room mates and my self have started preparing for other exams like P.O.etc, as we have lost hopes on new notifications in near future. If at all they come we shall be very happy like every body else.

All the best for both parties and their well wishers.

Anonymous said...

Friends, any updates on the case? when is it listed?

Anonymous said...

is there any hearing in high court?... please reply

Anonymous said...

no updates of court case(both in HC & SC). Kindly give status if some body have info. Some talk is there that because of this case new G1 notification is made late(of course bifurcation issue is also there).Is it true!?

Anonymous said...

next hearing is on october 7th..no new notifications in near future bcoz of bifurcation issue..

Anonymous said...

any updates

Anonymous said...

now hc or sc give what type of judgement and it is favour to appsc or applied one please give reasons

Anonymous said...

but it is clearly mentioned that it is adjourned for week.....and it is listing 7/10/2013

Anonymous said...

no one can guess tht...wait until the judgement is out.. or contact the cadidates lawyer for some inside info...and judge urself..

Anonymous said...

yah you are right(in a lighter vein)

Anonymous said...

FINALLY some hope...govt has given green signal to release notifications for Doctor posts..these r conducted by the concerned department ..and also these are STATE wide posts.... can we hope same thing in appsc ???? lets hope for the best...

Source : today's sakshi..

Anonymous said...

yah just now i have also seen that news. But wording looks bit ambiguous "mundithe notification ivaandi"

Nonetheless its a good sign for aspirants of various exams.

Any info about G1 case, whether its HC or SC!?

Anonymous said...

let the notification come first...exam will be conducted after 3 months na..by tht time situation wud hav cooled down... desperate for the noti...

Anonymous said...

No telangana. No samaikandra. We want notifications

Anonymous said...

Rel bet fr and dpsp...in madras st vs dorairajan case sc ruled that dpsps have to conform to and run as subsidary to frs.. in qureshi vs bihar st and ker edu bill sc ruled that a principle of harmonious construction should be applied andgovt should try to implement both frs & dpsps...in kes bha case sc said that frs and dpsps are supplementary and complementary to each other.dpsp set the goals and frs provide the means to achieve the goals...in TN vs abu baker case sc said that courts should try to coordinate frs and dpsps and should try to resolve conflict bet them az far as possible....in unni krishnan vs TN st sc said that frs and dpsps r complimentary to each other and while commenting upon frs, court should keep in mind both preamble and dpsps...in minerva mills case sc said that indian consti is founded on the bedrock of balance bet frs and dpsps.to give primacy to one over the other is to disturb the harmony of the constitution .the harmony and balance bet fr and dpsp is an essential feature of the constitution. This is fr padala rami reddi.. it was asked in mains.. if somebody finds fault pls comment. Otherwise send this to lakshya web pls pls pls.. next i wil come with evolution of mahayanism on which i did research and origin of varna and caste also on which i studied extensively.

Anonymous said...

If this ans is wrong pls correct me... rise of mahayanism...many hypotheses were put forward regarding origin of mahayanism..1.acc to max muller, keith and others, it developed in north western india under the influence of zoroastrianism, manichaeism etc. The dev of gandhara art in N-W india strengthens the arguement..w.2...acc to some scholars ganga valley in the post mauryan period witnessed the rise bhagavatism which pulled masses by devotional concept.. In order to attract masses a sect of buddism introduced the concept of bhakti which led to rise of mahayanism in ganga valley. Dev of mathura art stengthens their arguements....some historians believe that the principles of mahayanism originated in andhra desa, where nagarjuna gave a particular shape to mahayanism. He collected and compiled the basic books of mahayanism like ratnakuta, vaipula,pragnaparamitha etc. Acc to pragnaparamitha some sects of buddhism in andra desa like vaitulyukas,mahasunyathavadas etc. Were inclined towards household life. Hence some scholars beleive that mahayanism originated in andra from the beliefs of such sects of buddhism and later spread to north india via orrisa...whatever be the birthplace of mahayanism, its seeds lies in the esoteric teachings of buddha itself.mahayanism originated after long deliberations and analytical explanations of such teachings by buddhist monks.. traders,artisans,agriculturists etc.were chiief patrons. In order to allow them to sanga, a sect of buddhism did not oppose to household life,andattaining salvation by these sections. Thus the prevalent socio-eco conditions and reformed attitude of a sect of buddism led to the dev of mahayanism by the turn of 1st cen AD

Anonymous said...

I want to divert my friends from unnecessary arguements which r actually supposed to take place in courts. .that is why i posted these answers. These obstacles may delay our postings, but they do not deny us. For freshers my view is that appsc may take some time to conduct exams, but it wil definitely conduct exams. It took 3 years for last time gr1. I do not mean to say that it takes so much time this time, but we should have patience becuse of unforseen circumstances. All the best to my friends who r awaiting gr1 results

Anonymous said...

Nice efforts buddy.

to my knowledge much of the information provided is right.

Keep it up

Anonymous said...

Guys any info about the existing group case in SC & HC.

New Group 1 notification.

Even if govt clears new notification,(hope so) will that be affected by because of present Gr 1 case in SC & HC? Any idea/information!?

Anonymous said...

2008 gr1 notification was given in dec 2008, and interviews for 2007 notification were conducted in may-june 2009. Similarly interviews for 2008 noti were conducted in jan-feb 2012, whereas 2011gr1 noti was given in dec 2011. So in my view, coming noti is not delayed by the court case

Anonymous said...

any info on court case?

Is there re mains going to be for all or only to new entrants or the whole case is closed without any such kind of decesion

very eager to know whats going on at all!

Anonymous said...

wat happened to gr1 case? why is this silence all of a sudden? do we have to really wait till oct 7th to know the status?

Anonymous said...

rumor @ ashok nagar
dat c.m has sent a note to regarding notifications...DID ANYBODY KNOWS

Anonymous said...

what note is tht bhai..plz tell clearly.. any progress from CM will be covered by newspapers...

Anonymous said...

What happened to court case?

what about UPSC report on 4 questions!?

any info?

Anonymous said...

huge gathering of group 1 interviewed candidates in hyderabad on 1/09/2013 for further discussions on results

Anonymous said...

UPSC report is not called for at the moment.. case is in SC and it is adjourned to oct 7th..

Anonymous said...

where is the gathering to be held?

Anonymous said...

BHASHEER BAGH PRESS CLUB 9:00 A.M ON 1/09/2013

Anonymous said...

please give correct answer to this question
Q)who is formulator of ""first theory of evolution???""
a.darwin b. lamarck
appsc is giving darwin in one exam lamarck in other exam.please help me in this regard if any with proofs if possible, so that i am on verge of getting job.please undersatand and reply positivelyy friends...

Anonymous said...

http://www.tnpsc.gov.in/gos/MA.%20Ravivarma%20_%20correctness%20of%20key%20answers%20related.pdf

ladies and gentle men, please go thru this link....

Anonymous said...

This link is useful for which case?

Anonymous said...

didn't you googled!?

Anonymous said...

proofs are important friend.i want good proofs.if u have any please attach or give links.thank u

Anonymous said...

Friend if you enter ""first theory of evolution". you get wikipedia details and references in the bottom. once you go through it, you shall come to know in detail.

Hope those books and journal papers(which are given as links.

And one more thing, deciding which is first is interpretation of historians in the field of "evolution theories". Though subject is science, questions is equivalent to humanities. So, there exist ambiguity always- "like theories on extinction of harappan civilization". every theory has strong an weak points."

Think you need to knock tribunal's door, then HC and if needed SC, and wait for months like in G1 present case.

Hope your exam wont be dragged like G1 case.


Any ways all the best.

Anonymous said...

friend i am already on verge of completion of the above said matters.But APPSC giving 2 different answers in two different exams. The question given is clear.then why ambiquity??
1.who formulated theory of evolution means darwin
2.who first formulated theory of evolution means darwin
3.but who formulated first theory of evolution means lamarck.

friends once go through the above 3 different sentence formations and change of answer.what do u sayyy??

Anonymous said...

http://www2.estrellamountain.edu/faculty/farabee/BIOBK/biobookevoli.html

http://www.funtrivia.com/askft/Question99747.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_evolutionary_thought

http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_1.htm

These are few links which i have gone through, which indirectly says "lamarck". As i said earlier any body can get proofs of either"Darwin" as answer or "lamark" as answer.

Regarding variation of answers for the same question in diff. exams, i assume that its because of different paper setters. Time has come for APPSC to look after these silly issues which shall ruin lives of people like anything.

I can Understand you frustation as i am following this Group 1 Case, which is in similar lines.

Any ways once again all the best.

Anonymous said...

I hope this link is pertaining to the demonstration of correct answers to the erroneous key. It might be similar to our Gr-1 case. Isn't it?

Anonymous said...

Hi friends, Go through the following judgment.

Rajesh Kumar & Ors. etc. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. etc.
[Civil Appeal Nos. 2525-2516 of 2013 arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos.5752-53 of 2008]
Abhishek Kumar & Ors. Vs State Of Bihar & Ors.
[Civil Appeal No. 2517 of 2013 arising out of SLP (C) No.6456 of 2008]
T.S. THAKUR, J.
Judgment:
1. answer scripts of candidates appearing in 'A' series of competition examination held pursuant to advertisement No. 1406 of 2006 shall be got re-evaluated on the basis of a correct key prepared on the basis of the report of Dr. (Prof.) CN Sinha and Prof. KSP Singh and the observations made in the body of this order and a fresh merit list drawn up on that basis.
2. Candidates who figure in the merit list but have not been appointed shall be offered appointments in their favour. Such candidates would earn their seniority from the date the appellants were first appointed in accordance with their merit position but without any back wages or other benefit whatsoever.
3. In case writ petitioners-respondent nos. 6 to 18 also figure in the merit list after re-evaluation of the answer scripts, their appointments shall relate back to the date when the appellants were first appointed with continuity of service to them for purpose of seniority but without any back wages or other incidental benefits.
4. Such of the appellants as do not make the grade after re- evaluation shall not be ousted from service, but shall figure at the bottom of the list of selected candidates based on the first selection in terms of advertisement No.1406 of 2006 and the second selection held pursuant to advertisement No.1906 of 2006.
5. Needful shall be done by the respondents - State and the Staff Selection Commission expeditiously but not later than three months from the date a copy of this order is made available to them.
20. Parties are directed to bear their own costs.
......................................J. (T.S. THAKUR)
......................................J. (GYAN SUDHA MISRA)
New Delhi
March 13, 2013

Anonymous said...

The following are the sources of evidence for correct answers in Gr-1 prelims exam:

Sources for PVC:

1.http://www.pvc.org/en/p/intravenous-exposure
2.‘The role of PVC in healthcare’ by Colin R Blass
3.‘http://www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/UCM080457.pdf’
4.‘http://ndt.oxfordjournals.org/content/11/12/2439.abstract?sid=b37daf4f-e221-4bef-b1f9-28d4ace6fbf4Abstract’
5.Handbook for dialysis Nurses- 2nd edition by Dr Abdulla A Al-Khader and Mohammed Al-Jondeby
6.Official journal of American Academy of Paediatricians-‘http://www.pediatricsdigest.mobi/content/113/5/e429.full’
7.http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/AlertsandNotices/PublicHealthNotifications/ucm062182.htm
8.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/236252.stm
9.‘Safety Assessment of Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) Released from PVC Medical Devices’ by Center for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 12709 Twinbrook Parkway, Rockville, MD 20852
10.Handbook of Dialysis , third edition, Volume 236, by John T. Daugirdas, Peter Gerard Blake, Todd S. Ing

Sources for Seshachalam:

1.10th Class social studies text book published by A.P Govt.
2.8th Class social studies text book published by A.P Govt.
3.http://www.aptourism.in/index.php/k2-separator/k2/item/37-tirupatitemple#.US2pLfJoyTY
4.http://www.hindubooks.org/temples/andhrapradesh/tirupati/page1.htm
5.http://www.etirupati.com/seven_hills.htm
6.http://www.ttdsevaonline.com/
7.http://www.templenet.com/Andhra/tirupati02.html

Sources for 22 states:

1.IDKN website, a part of NIDM.
2.UNDP report on disaster management in India

Sources for Squint: Squeeze:

1.Tata Mcgraw hill book
2.RS Aggarwal book

Sources for No. of people killed due to disasters from 1980-2010:

1.Planning commission report
2.UNDP report.
3.IDKN website, a part of NIDM.

Friends, Any thoughts, points to share...?

Anonymous said...

Friend unless case details/arguments of appellants and respondents are not studied thoroughly, decision on judgement paras can't be understood.

But your search for similar cases to G1 case is app-laudable.

Keep it up

Anonymous said...

keeping 606 aside,allow some more candidates for mains and interview as early as possible may be the rational way out.Its hard to hang on for years together in dilemma.Pls,APPSC make wise and timely decision ASAP

Anonymous said...

Even this option of solution may take several months(note: with out any other cases against this decision). Don't know future of present and future aspirants

Anonymous said...

" 73. Before we part with this matter, we would like to express our hope that the Tamil Nadu
Public Service Commission will be more careful in future while conducting the examinations. If
the answers to the questions posed are to be rendered in an objective manner, the Public Service
Commission should be very vigilant about the correctness of the answers. The paper setters and
the examiners ought to have greater concern for the large number of candidates who give this
examination and whose future career depends upon their selection. We expect the Public
Service Commission to be much more thoughtful while setting papers for the future
examinations to be conducted by them.

74. With these observations, we dispose of all the proceedings. "


Given above is verdict by SC in tnpsc case referred above. Similar verdict given in present Group 1 case, probably shall end this confusion.Re mains for new ones or for all aspirants again etc shall create extra problems than that of solving the existing ones for existing and new aspirants. It may not be liked by quite number of people infact me too, but in my opinion this kind of solution could end this issue once for all.

Anonymous said...

verdict
case1: re mains for extra eligible candidates. the big question is how to scale the two mains.
case2: re mains for all candidates
IN APPSC key, the disaster management question wrong according to ministry of home affairs disaster management website and other APPSC exams key in which the question asked(correct answer 1,43,--- not 1,23--). The remaining questions are either ambiguity or right answers. Court has to do justice to all, they will most probably gibe case 1 justice if not possible case 2. In case 2 also, 606 candidates will not loss because they also get chance and if a candidate has worth, he can write one more time also like re conducting elections if some wrong doing happen.
I am also one among 606 and preparing for UPSC mains in December.

Anonymous said...

First of all its good to see that you are for UPSC this december. 606 are worthy enough, that's why they are 606(Including you). If you felt other way, you could have informed about that in interview it self for "that you got into 606 just by sheer luck". If some candidate who is in 606 at present and shall not be in new 606 as per case 2 files a petition after case 2 exams are over are you and all 16K+ are ready for third mains and so on to prove worthiness. Isn't it silly!?

If you feel so, lets do one thing "in your upcoming UPSC exams too if you get posting after clearing your mains and interview too(hope so), for the sake of worthiness you don't accept that posting and sit for 2014 mains and prove your worthiness." and keep on doing it till your attempts or you age comes to end. It looks stupid na. similar is your explantion on case 2.

Even in our elections if some body is lost say by very few votes and say there are sizable number of invalid votes, are they holing re elections or finalizing verdict by the existing polled and valid votes?So, any example can be changed to our suit our arguments. right!?

Even in case 1 too there may be cases by new not qualified to interview aspirants about scaling again and again.

What we need to look at is macroscopic picture of issue. If that's the way probably that TNPSC case verdict seems to be correct one like some body already told.

Anonymous said...

Friends just now seen a scrolling in a news channel"telanga bill before parliament on 12th september:balaram naik(Central minister)".

Any idea about repurcussions of it on present G1 notification and future notifications.

Anonymous said...

yaar,,..why r u so impatient to hear others' views ?? i know u r among 606 and so is he.. he has raised a valid point .. so u feel that SC has to give WARNING to appsc and strike down the case ?? wht abt those candidates who r fighting for past one year ???? r they fighting the case just to see punches by the SC to appsc ???

u hav to agree thr is mistake on part of appsc.. now the main thing is how they solve this ???

re-mains for few candidates seems logical..they too shud get the chance... and ultimately ranks r on basis of merit..so dont worry

bhai...since when we start believing these worthless politicians ??? even if its true , it wont affect the present notification as its in SC..

future notifications are in the hands of CM ...

Anonymous said...

yaar, why are you also so impatient to hear other sides view too. No where it was told that points he expressed are wrong. What he was expressing are his opinions about repercussions and a similar example in support of his views. Why are you so impatient to even think about his views too. I am unable to get it. Do you think that every others ideas or ideologies should in line with yours.

why do you get so impatient about others when they express view looking in a different and wider angle.

Wording should be sensible. "worthiness" is a big word in debates, kindly start typing with a peaceful and unbiased mind.

"In case 2 also, 606 candidates will not loss because they also get chance and if a candidate has worth, he can write one more time also like re conducting elections if some wrong doing happen", doesn't these statements shows impatience and reckless, irrelevant comparisons for the existing debate. What authority he has to compare about worthiness of others.

It could have been better had you suggested him to concentrate on UPSC mains rather to this re mains issue, because there won't be re mains in CSC mains(hopefully). Instead you have started frowning other guy who expressed his views.

Probably his opinion was based on previous supreme court verdict given above, of course which is not written by him. It seems his view is atleast a bit unbiased. Because i read both views before typing my comments as i am not all in the league of 606.

Of course we need to believe politicians or atleast hear what they say cautiously some times. Till july 29th no body expected any bold decision on telangana issue, but i has come out from the same politicians bhai. So we cant under estimate their comments. Thats why opinions were asked.


All the best to worthy UPSC mains aspirant bhai

Anonymous said...

thanku very much friend for ur concern.friend may i know whether ur a candidate who is waiting for group 1 results or candidate who entered court for correcting key.
friend i am a candidate who knocked tribunal door for justice and ours is just only written exam based and no interview.
we have very good set of questions with key mistakes apart from this question both in gs and subject.i lost due to age in open category.

Anonymous said...

friend even according to ur sources it sounds much that it is lamarck onlyy.but APPSC is giving darwin.i have good proofs from ncert ,intermediate 2nd year zoology text,wikipedia etc.so lets see friend wat happens.anyways thanks very much for ur help friend

Anonymous said...

Hi boss, i don't belong to both parties. But am related to APPSC in other way, as i have written G1 mains few times earlier . But didnt cleared. I accept that there are always mistakes done by APPSC in objective papers. I feel there may be recklessness in subjective paper too. Because inspite of hard efforts iam very near to interview cutoff but not in interview list. Even marks seems to be absurd.

It looks or hears odd, but i started believing "karma" concept after these failures to get in interview. I am very sorry for your loss of job. Hope these APPSC guys keep in mind while preparing questions for any exam with this G1 case. Those guys are doing really an app laudable job. Hats off to them.

Wish there wont be unfortunate guys like us in future.

All the best for your future plans to get a job.

Anonymous said...

i think even APPSC did and will do such mistakes and also corruption.the only thing we need from APPSC is job.so atleast judiciary should be good enough to do justice,thats sol.we have enough good judgements in this country from apex courts in similar lines.even i have collected those.i personally attend few times in present group 1 case in high court,it was very interesting too.the petitioners counsels were excellent, they outspoken and had bunch of previous judgements where a commitee if constituted should show proofs attached with it,otherwise such report is baseless and useless.so no need to worry atall, justice will be done to those candidates who lost with those questions.days have gonee where apex courts just warning PSC'S, BECAUSE BEFORE THIS CASE,THERE R ENOUGH GOOD JUDGEMENTS IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONERS, WHO LOST DUE TO KEY MISTAKES.

Anonymous said...

You are right. Re mains to those new entrants seems to be soluton. Any ways lets wait for judgement.

Hope SC shall look into plight of people who are facing problems to some extents because of these 300+ posts laying vacant for last two years. Hope justice is also provided to them.

Anonymous said...

yes. there's similarity between this case and our current grp 1 case.

Anonymous said...

yesterday meeting was grand success,

I am very happy to witness the real leaders who

are flag bearers

Anonymous said...

Please let us know what happened in your meeting.. What steps you are taking? What decision you people have taken yesterday in your meeting?

Anonymous said...

Are u an interview candidate?? if yes first can u plz let me know why didnt u attend the meeting yesterday? its pretty simple to sit back and ask qs on internet or phone but wat is really needed is u have to come forward for our cause and support our friends who are fighting for us.

Anonymous said...

gud to see that aspirants r coming together. plz enquire abt new notification also whn u get to meet appsc chairman or other important persons.

Anonymous said...

Can anybody say with a stamp of authority, as to what is most likely to transpire in the concurrent proceedings in SC, regarding re-mains?

Anonymous said...

how many went to basheerbagh meeting? Did anyone from here went there? let all of them here know what happened in the meeting...

Anonymous said...

what to do with their meeting bhai. Let us wait for SC decision.

Anonymous said...

Please share the minutes of the meeting. Our Unity Zindabad.

Anonymous said...

I dont think no body have any info "with a stamp of authority" about the proceedings in SC, not even judge as he has many other cases to deal with.

In my view it could be either re mains to newly qualified or similar verdict like TNPSC case for those interviewed candidates. To my opinion i feel any one of them could be solution
( Note: there is normalization problem with limited re mains and closing case like of TNPSC too).

It's just a opinion. For final verdict we need to wait till 7/10/13 or beyond that date.

All the best for both the set of people.

Anonymous said...

HI,

SUB inspector of POlice (S.I) and FRO (forest range officer ) are under GRP-3 .. pls clarify

Anonymous said...

Dont Know whether they belong to GRP 3 or not. But they are held seperately. What is the issue of whether its GRP 1 or 2 or 3. Pray for new notifications

Anonymous said...

i think FRO comes under g1 kadr

Anonymous said...

Unity for what ??? u r not fighting against a political party or govt decision (or for a new state !!). u r fighting a case in supreme court. u shud consult the lawyer rather than such meetings..

Unknown said...

I hope CM responds positively on the notifications issue....as there are many unemployed youth looking out for these notifications.

Anonymous said...

Why to show anguish on them bhai ! ?

They have their issues, may be meetings are for that. What is problem to us with their meetings. Let wait for SC decision.

Anonymous said...

who am i to decide wht they do bro ? they can do anything.i am not opposing. just responded to his zindabad talks :)

Anonymous said...

What posts do come under engineering (Gazetted) category and what posts come under engineering (Non-gazetted) category ?

Anonymous said...

HI,

SUB inspector of POlice (S.I) and FRO (forest range officer ) are under which group category ..? as per the pay scale i assume there are under grp-3 ,not in grp-2.. any one idea

Balivada suryanarayana said...

S.I BASIC PAY 14860 AND F.R.O BASIC PAY 15280,BOTH ARE GAZITED POSTS .BOTH ARE ENTRY LEVEL GAZ CAT POSTS.S.I ARE RECRUITED THROUGH P.R.B AND FRO IS BY APPSC.S.I IS MANDAL LEVAL POST AND FRO IS HIGHER THAN THAT.

Anonymous said...

thank you Suri.. for clarification..

but i want to know under which group category 3 or 2 , they (S.I &FRO) will come .. please let me know

Anonymous said...

please clarify about G1 re mains?
re mains for whom? Already 15000 candidates
are qualified in prelims out of them 9000
appeared for mains 606 candidates qualified
in mains , Re mains for 606 qualified in
mains , Re mains who didn't cleared mains,
Re mains who were absent to write mains,
this is like Galli lo chelli pelli malli malli

Anonymous said...

Re mains is just not like cancellation

of a bus, train ticket, many of our friends

spent years of productive time for these

examinations, many qualified interview for

2 nd time, some for 3 rd time so just

think how many years they have dedicated

to this exam

Anonymous said...

many of us resigned jobs for preparation
some of them taken long leaves witness their SR
married women left their families for preparation,
unmarried postponed their marriages, qualified in
mains attended the interview and waiting for 6 long
months for the results facing lot psychological pain

Anonymous said...

let me share some facts some candidates
who are among 606 successful candidates
cannot avail leave for preparation , a woman
who recently delivered a baby can she write
re mains, no fault of her,
Re mains for successful candidates is just
punishment for no fault of them

Anonymous said...

I don't think there is re mains for those who have already qualified to write mains in last sept.

Even the case is regarding the so called"justice" to candidates who have lost opportunity because of so called " wrong answers". Probably they shall be writing it if SC orders in their favour.

There are only two solutions it seems, like some body in previous messages wrote:

1) Re mains to those newly qualified to mains, if SC orders to revise key.
2) To close case like of TNPSC.

No where there is a scope for Re mains to all. Why it should be like that.Whats the point in every one for mains again. SC will sort out problem of comparison(normalization) between new and old mains, if at all it orders for re mains to new guys.

Don't think why this "re mains to all" claim is being raised again and again.Are there any vested interests in this claim? Only God must be knowing?!

Let us wait till 7/10/13 friends.

Anonymous said...

"Galli lo chelli pelli malli malli", ee sametha mee inti sambandhinchina vishyalalo paatinchandhi sir.

Case is about opportunity lost to aspirants because of wrong APPSC key(as per their claim), then whats the point in asking

"Re mains for 606 qualified in mains , Re mains who didn't cleared mains,Re mains who were absent to write mains"

Is there any sense in asking about statement inspite of knowing whats the case is about. If you are not aware kindly go though chat box and messages in this discussion forum too.

If those guys against APPSC wins, re mains shall be for all who lost oppurtunity because of wrong key, means newly qualified candidates.

If APPSC wins with punches or without, there wont be any issue of re mains at all.

Vulgar rayadam manukondi.

Let us wait for SC Judgement.

Anonymous said...

My friend, the reason why re-mains issue is in the fore is becoz it forms the core of the plea/prayer of the WP filed by the petitioners in Jan 2013 in honorable HC. They wanted Hon’ble High Court to constitute a Third Party Committee by external experts to have unbiased report and to redraw the list based on the outcome of the Third party Expert Committee Report and call the candidates afresh for the Mains examination as per the revised key and to complete the selection process right from Mains examination and direct PSC not to continue with any further selection process/stay all further proceedings.

Now that this is in the Hon’ble Supreme Court, all we can do is but to wait till a little over a month for the final outcome. Until then we can air our options and solutions and even try to justify them.

Anonymous said...

plz dont raise the issue of "re-mains to all".otherwise these guys may kick u . thoda tolerance levels badao bhai :)

wht will u do if the same argument is made by the opposite lawyer in SC ?

so u also better wait for the judgement rather than showing ur legal intelligence in this forum.

repeating same options again and again here wont solve the case.leave the judgement to the court and do ur work. who doesnt hav vested interests ? u want the case to be struck like TNPSC and they want re-mains. mere raising of tht issue in this forum will harm u in any way ?? if yes , tell us. then we will keep quiet !!

Anonymous said...

I am not raising "issue of Re mains to all". If some body kicks for my unbiased opinion, i surely going to bash them up bhai, for their biased opinion on "re mains to all".

"legal intelligence" for this case!.... no need of such big word. What is needed is common sense with unbiased view of both interviewed and opportunity lost candidates as per appsc key (as per their view).

Repeating same opinion of "Re mains to all" also wont solve this case too.

"
1) Re mains to those newly qualified to mains, if SC orders to revise key.
2) To close case like of TNPSC.
"
Both the option are related to aggrieved parties, whats problem to you if i comment "no need of re mains to all", why all should write mains again.Those guys who felt that thy lost opportunity have filed case against APPSC. if they win they shall write mains, if they loose no body write mains again.

If "opposite lawyer" raises same issue SC will take care of it. It knows what's "justice" is!.

whats the point in every body writing mains again?

For me i want new notification. I am following this case, so that in future if same kind of thing arises, i may be knowing what to do then.

"so u also better wait for the judgement", kindly follow you suggestions before you start preaching others and wait for the same what you are preaching us.

Anonymous said...

I left my baby ,at my house and wrote mains ,when it was 15 days,because of which my health got spoiled.i had UPSC civils mains also,in OCtober...which i could not clear becoz i had 12 marks left for selection..that was last attempt...now tell me ,if i had known this remains concept i would have fullfledged prepared for UPSC only

Anonymous said...

Friend, Plea/Prayer are representations only. Do you think in the judgement every word of plea is considered?. Its just a prima facie for admitting a case(as far as i am aware).

There is no rule that even if judgement comes in your or thier favour, every word of the plea is accepted. That plea may claim redraw list and conduct process again. That's their view.

May be judge says, even if mains list is redrawn again, no need for mains to previous candidates if they are in both old and new list. This is the point the above seems to be conveying.

He is also correct in one way, if not giving opportunity to some body else is injustice, it seems writing mains again for all(inclusive of previously written candidates is also injustice) as previously written candidate is given two opportunities to write mains, where as only one for the newly writing candidates. May be after results of new mains, the candidate with only one chance of mains if not selected may claim for one more mains, and this may go on. Its good only if those new candidates be given opportunity for Re mains, provided SC gives judgement in their favour.

Every body untill then can air their opinions. Let us wait for verdict when it comes.

Anonymous said...

Your concern is correct madam. Previously also some body brought to notice of this blog about similar incidents.

I hope SC takes care of all, including those who have filed case, when it gives verdict.

"Justice is for all, and should be to all". In the name of justice , injustice shouln't be done.

Lets wait for little over a month to see verdict.

Anonymous said...

This case is all about not letting APPSC to repeat the mistakes time and again. Since u claim that u have been following this case, What have you learnt? "so that in future if same kind of thing arises, i may be knowing what to do then."

You are one those guys who don't do anything but just to preach others and chatting in these forums. You won't do anything even if you would come across similar crisis in future. You simply will sit and type the same. Then all of us wiil say 'So called mistakes' and 'so called justice'. How could you use such kind of terms in a forum like this?

If you have already written Mains, is there any guarantee that u will get into the post? Then, what hinders you in writing the Mains again, if some sort of 'so called justice' is happening all the friends? You said that you are waiting for a new notification. I feel that you live in dreams. Does the present situation in our state make you think about new notifications in near future. It's better to write mains within 2/3 months (if SC says so,) than awaiting for new notifications in the future.

You gave two options, how about the third option?
If those 1201 candidates who wrote mains but cudn't qualify for the interview just bcoz of the revision of key by PSC start fighting for their right, then whole prelims exam may get cancelled...

So, think like a wise man! Let's wait for the order. That's all...

Anonymous said...

My friend, little correction..."Redraw the merit list of all the candidates and the Individual marks list of all the candidates to validate the cut-off and then to conduct Mains afresh".

Bcoz they thought that this alone would put an end to the present issue and also prevent PSC not to repeat the same in future.

Anonymous said...

i am not telling they will kick u. u r talking as if "re-mains for all" is a sin.if anybody raises tht , they hav vested interests and its a conspiracy against merit system !! u r sounding like chasing them out if they ask for fresh mains.

let the lawyers fight and court decide.why u r telling some opinion is useless and if somebody raises tht u r hellbent on proving them wrong ?

even the lawyers hav commonsense . so dont worry..u r not the only one to possess it.

the writ filed by the candidates r demanding a fresh list to be made on revised key. fresh list means fresh mains.its obvious. its abt FRESH MAINS vs STRIKE DOWN the entire case.so try to listen the other opinion too. i am not in a position to judge , neither do u . so dont judge them . let the court do its work.

niether appsc nor the aspirants lawyer is asking for "re-mains for some". some intelligent guys hav invented this.

u present ur opinion .nothing wrong with it. why u want to brand them as "vested interests" as if they r waging a war against a sovereign nation ? so dont force ur views on the opposite side.

i am not preaching anything to u or anyone. u r talking as if u know the other side does not stand chance at all. if thr is no merit in the case , why SC will ask abt re-mains ?

we know u hav bigger stake in this judgement , given tht u attended interview. i wish u all the best.

plz use this forum for updating the case status or information gained through contact with lawyers. no need to discuss personal opinions here. whtever we debate here , is waste of time or timepass.

Anonymous said...

My dear Friend, SC clearly stated during the arguments that PSC should not think of conducting second Mains as the apex court had given the judgment in 2004/05 case that two prelims may be considered but not two mains exams. The same was re-emphasised by SC in this case too. Hence, we shall pray God to bless all of us.

Anonymous said...

Bro.. didnt you feel that you sounded offensive?? why bring his/her family matter into this? you didnt like the above comment so have written your views on it and thats fair enough.The above comment is not at all vulgar and it is used as a comparision. But i can say that your suggestion is plain rude. Every body is entilted to his/ her opinion while waiting for the judgement

Anonymous said...

You are correct my friend. It is not necessary that every word of plea should be considered. But every word of plea is read before giving the final judgment. The judgment is based on the parameters of the plea only. Otherwise SC can not give the judgment out of the box which is not related to the present plea/case. As I have posted recently, SC during the arguments made a clear statement that PSC shall not think of conducting second mains for those who qualify rather it shall conduct the whole exercise afresh based upon the revised key and marks list.

Anonymous said...

be cool , my dear friends,let us have
full faith in our judiciary,

Anonymous said...

Friend, Do you mean that the probability is high for conducting a re-mains for all? (In case the judgement goes in favour of the petitioners)

Anonymous said...

I support ur views,,boss. How can these people use words like 'vested interestes', 'so called justice' just only to demean others? Whatever you have said is absolutely true. If there is no merit in the case, SC would have struck off then and there itself.

Even the Tribunal and HC have made the statement that the PSC had not produced any substantial evidence whereas the candidates have produced most authentic and reliable sources of evidence in support of correct answer choices.

This inevitably shows that there has been mistake from APPSC and as we all know, it is trying hard to dig its own grave to cover up the mess. If not support those candidates, let's not oppose them.

Latest update is that APPSC tried to get the case on the bench by 15th Sept, but SC has not approved to do so. Hence, let's wait for 7th October.

Anonymous said...

Yes, my dear friend! People are confused with the term 're-mains'. It's called 'fresh mains' becoz the first mains gets null and void as soon the judgment goes in their favour.

Anonymous said...

Yes, it's hard to digest. But the truth is that truce justice implies 'justice to all' by one way or the other. If u truly believe in this aspect, then be ready to write the 'fresh mains to all' keeping in mind the facts of the case and previous SC judgments. I think it alone would resolve this issue.

Anonymous said...

my friend, I also think in the similar lines. Someone has already posted that SC made a clear statement on conducting only one MAINS examination based on its previous judgement.

On this ground, it is evident that SC would either strike off the case or direct PSC to conduct Mains for all. Only these two are the available options.

Because SC wants to end such chaos and give a positive judgment to all. That's the reason why it had asked appsc not to think about second mains.

I don't think it would hurt anyone including the interviewed candidates including myself. Instead of struggling in such confusion, it's better to speed up the process by some way or the other. All of us are struggling and facing our own personal crises. We should be ready to face any situation, be it the fresh mains or cancellation of whole recruitment including prelims...

Let's see!!!

Anonymous said...

Sir, if there is fresh mains to all then the candidates who already gave the inteview or who nearly missed will give tough competition to the new entrants.How is this fair?? so far i heard that mains will be only for new list of candidates.then wat is the use of fighting and then facing a stiff competition

Anonymous said...

If u r not willing to share what happened in the meeting, then you might have invited all of us over phone or through mails? why did you intimate about the meeting through this forum? You are not supposed to order or demand others' whereabouts. Please share the information in a healthy way. If we know what course of legal action they are going to take and what kind of support you require, then only we'll be able to support you.

Anonymous said...

Dont expect anything from this forum if u want any info be in touch with the candidates. anyways waiting till oct 7th is the only option i suggest.

Anonymous said...

Bro, You simplified the word 'Plea' as if it is a representation. But just go through the following meaning:

Plea (pl)
n.
1. An earnest request; an appeal: spoke out in a plea for greater tolerance.
2. An excuse; a pretext: "necessity,/The Tyrant's plea" (John Milton).
3. Law
a. An allegation offered in pleading a case.
b. A defendant's answer to the declaration made by the plaintiff in a civil action.
c. The answer of the accused to a criminal charge or indictment: entered a plea of not guilty.
d. A special answer depending on or demonstrating one or more reasons why a suit should be delayed, dismissed, or barred in equity law.
e. An action or suit.

So in legal terms, Plea is just not a representation, rather it is a an action or allegation by the aggrieved party. While delivering the judgment, any court would thoroughly go into the plea/prayer and the basic facts and evidences of the case, then only it would be able to deliver the judgment.

Please share what you completely know. Don't spoil other's time by sharing your half-knowledge statements. You are not a judge or a court to deal with legal issues. As you rightly said, let's wait for the final verdict but I reques you no to air such silly opinions, my friend. This won't suit the capacity of a Gr-1 aspirant like you.

Anonymous said...

I know what I am learning and learn t already. You also seems to be those one of the guys who simply sitting here and frowning on others who have opinions other than you. I know what to do when these kind of situation arises. One thing is sure that I wont keep on typing and forcing others to accept my views. If "worthy", "paid for posting in this forum" are right, these 'So called mistakes' etc are equally right to be used in this forum.
If there is no guarantee that even after writing mains I am not sure of getting any post, why should i , you and all run behind claim of writing it once again. What kinds of dream you are also dreaming of writing of mains, in the present condition of state even if re mains are ordered. There is no guarantee for anything. Then why don’t you dream for new notification too, along with that writing of mains again. In fact dreaming for new notification seems to be good idea, as, we all if clear that could be writing that without any court case tensions.
Your third option itself validates my dream of new notification. Why don’t you think in that way?
You have given third option. Let other give fourth option, what’s problem for you to write opinion. Your word ”That’s all...” , shows how open you are to others opinion.
I never said others opinion are useless, instead you are saying I shouldn’t tell opinions which are not matching with yours. You are hell bent on proving that I am wrong, While doing the same for me. I know who else here or outside have “common sense” and didn’t claimed I only had (for you information).
Iam also saying that this case is ”abt FRESH MAINS vs STRIKE DOWN”. Infact I have given one more option of already raised point-“re mains to new only”. I am also not in a position like you to judge it. I request you too to consider others comments too.
"re-mains for some" may be its coined somebody else apart from APPSC or Candidates. But there is no wrong in considering it. Why don’t you even think of this option at all?
I am also writing opinion like you. Why are frowning on me again and again for voicing my opinion like you. We all here know you too have bigger stakes in claiming “re mains to all”. I too wish you all the best.
I just questioned why two opportunities to many and one opportunity to few (new entrants). Let everybody be given equal playing field. That's my opinion, then why are you people branding that other opnion than you if posted are being paid. If there is merit in “re mains” to all SC could have done that in the first hearing it self. Then why do you think that it has postponed for some more time. Lets wait till decides it.
I know what i have lent from this case being a third party person, not like the one who call justice to write mains again when an chance is already provided. You are spoiling chance of newly qualified candidates(if SC re draws list) by writing mains for two times, where as they get only one. What kind of justice you are running behind.
None here is a judge of SC. Lets wait till SC gives judgement
Why you people are frowning on others if they let their opinion in this discussion. Why dont you hear them at all.
It is seems sin by you people if some body don't accept the "Re mains to all". Every body have opinion like you have.
My friend, if you feel debate here is waste of time, there is no need to visit this blog. No body is forcing you to write your comments or to follow discussions.

Anonymous said...

Dear friend, Tough competition depends on how best the candidates have performed in the exams. It doesn't ascertain one's ability of doing well in an interview or an Exam.

Please be clear on your worries! Are you worried of writing mains again, or competing with those who had already done? The fighting is to acquire one' right to be in the competition, no matter whatever stiff it may be.

Work hard and leave the rest to God and APPSC. All the best.

Anonymous said...

cancellation it is not the movie , travel ticket

please tell me why Re mains for already prelims

eligible 15000 candidates only 9000 appeared for

mains , 606 qualified for interview, 8394 couldn't

cleared mains , why , what is the fault of 606

candidates to re write mains please justify

Anonymous said...

"Justice to all" will be provided only if fresh mains is for new ones. Other wise it will be not be called as "justice to all" if fresh mains is for all in the new list( if at all SC orders that), as quite many number of candidates who have already written mains earlier shall be getting one more chance- This it self is against"justice to all".

Think Re or fresh mains is for new candidates only.

Let's See!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

My dear friends there is no such rule that SC cant change its stance- Kindly go though our paper 2 sect 3 on few cases like kesavananda bharthi etc." SC may revise it based on that day situation to maintain "justice to all".

Here "justice to all" could be fresh mains to new only. other wise newly selected candidates are at loss as they are given only one chance and others shall have two.

There may be concept of two mains too, if two prelims concept is already implemented. We cant say any thing untill, it is clear from SC.

People hear are worried for new notifications rather than mains, fresh mains, fresh re mains and so on for the same notification of 2011 Group 1.

Anonymous said...

Sir, im already confused with this concept of remains/ fresh mains and now u r saying fresh prelims!! how fair is this sir? i may probably a new entrant if key is revised and i if any chance will want to write a mains only for new entrants coz fresh mains means im denied another chance and have to face severe competition..

Now as u said if it is new prelims then dont u think that it is better to expect a new notification than writing prelims with double the number of candidates..

call me selfish or anything i personally feel if the present case is solved as soon as possible then i'l be free of competition from 300+ candidates.This is wat u wish even if u r writing UPSC being a serious aspirant..

Anonymous said...

I qualified in mains after 3 attempts for 1st

time , iam already exhausted my entire leave

in this process now I cant avail leave any more

to prepare for the great group 1 mains iam damn

tired , please tell me friends why and how I have

to write mains again and also get qualified, what

is the mistake I committed, I even so far don't know

my marks which I think are my rights, even those

didn't qualified in prelims know their marks,

Anonymous said...

friends iam already reached 37 and have to

take care of my family in these situation

can I once again write mains & get qualified,

all my resources are exhausted, please justify

Anonymous said...

Kindly don't spoil others time too by just googling and pasting what comes in the dictionaries along with your biased statements.

Even in the meanings you have pasted no where it is given that whole of the plea will be typed in the judgement. In post also it is commented that plea/prayer shall be considered as "prime facie" for admitting case. Case shall be studied thoroughly along with arguments from respondents/petitioner too, in the course of arguments new things which are not written in plea like "fresh or re mains to only new candidates", may also come out. Its what is being conveyed in the above comment.

i request you too that till SC gives verdict kindly don't google and paste things which comes your mind that too with out reading others comments thoroughly.

You are also not a judge to decide for fresh mains or cancelling prelims it self.If you know whats going on in SC inform us.

Kindly don't apply your quarter knowledge here.

Anonymous said...

I have written mains like many

others with lots of hardships,

still I don't know my marks

which are my rights & some one

are simply commenting about re mains

why?

Anonymous said...

Bhai, you are giving 04/05 case. But TNPSC case has happend much later may in 2009 or 10, where they quashed petitions all variety of petitions, which include cancelling prelims too.Judgement is in favour of interviewed candidates. There are other petitions where it favoured candidates who lost oppurtunity to write mains.

So dont go by one judgement. It all depends on kind of case and arguments SC is hearing.

Let us all wait till first week of october.

Anonymous said...

My friend, why are so frightened to see if someone comes up with some valid points. I also dream of the 3rd option only. I am not your enemy, boss. All I intend is to have a healthy discussion with valid and authentic points. We all know that any court cannot simply give the judgments in one hearing without any arguments from both sides.

The reason why SC has postponed the case is that complete arguments were not held on the said day. So, it has given an opportunity to both to come up with arguments/counters. how can you question that "If there is merit in “re mains” to all SC could have done that in the first hearing it self"? Please ask someone who attended the court on that day.

I was just re-affirming what someone else has said about SC's comments during the arguments that there shall not be no second mains for fresh candidates.

It's not a sin to reject the idea of 'Re mains to all'. Everyone his/her right to raise the voice. But it should have substantial ground and valid points.

We all are the same sailors, my friend. I do not have any ill intention of writing mains again since I have attended the interview. Per se, I wish everyone should know what the truth is rather than posing comments which are pleasing to everyone.

Your statement 'I know what I am learning and learn t already' suffices your true nature. Any ways, It's upto you to decide. What I feel is everyone is a learner and shall continue to be a learner by one way or the other.

Why do you blast upon people who do not get into your shoes? Let's be good friends and share some healthy thoughts instead of denigrating others.

All the best...

Anonymous said...

hi, you have not claimed your right of knowing your marks as there is no such provision till the final selection is made. All of us are in the same situation. Talking about right, we cannot even file RTI about the marks in Mains till this process is over. They are not commenting, instead they are educating us on the proceedings as you and I cannot go to court or appsc. Let us wait for the final judgement.

Talking about marks in prelims, this is remind you that because this case only, we got to know cutoff and answer key. otherwise all of us would have been in dark. still we don't know who has got how many marks in prelims except omr sheets. Is'nt it?

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 821   Newer› Newest»

Followers