Published Jun 30, 2026 | 8:34 PM ⚊ Updated Jun 30, 2026 | 8:34 PM
The Kerala state PSC described the omission as an error in the evaluation process.
Synopsis: A major recruitment controversy has engulfed the Kerala Public Service Commission after it admitted that answers carrying 58 marks were left unevaluated in a high-level State Planning Board examination, even as rank lists were published and appointments made. The disclosure, unearthed through an RTI battle by candidates, has triggered fresh evaluation, vigilance inquiries and demands for an independent probe into the integrity of the selection process.
The Kerala Public Service Commission (PSC), the constitutional body entrusted with ensuring fair and transparent recruitment to government service, has found itself at the centre of a serious recruitment controversy.
This follows its admission that a crucial part of a competitive examination for three senior posts in the State Planning Board was left unevaluated before rank lists were finalised and appointments were made.
The disclosure, which surfaced only after candidates pursued copies of their answer scripts through prolonged legal and Right to Information proceedings, has raised serious questions over the integrity of the recruitment process, the commission’s handling of the lapse and the transparency of its evaluation system.
With the PSC now ordering a fresh evaluation of all answer scripts, revising the rank lists and initiating an internal vigilance inquiry, the episode has reignited debate over the credibility of the state’s premier recruiting agency. It has also revived earlier allegations surrounding other high-profile selections and fuelled demands for an independent investigation into whether the lapse was merely an administrative failure or indicative of deeper irregularities.
Also Read: Kerala PSC opens India’s first state-level museum
The PSC has admitted that answers to 10 descriptive questions were left unevaluated in the recruitment examination for three prestigious posts in the State Planning Board.
The recruitment was for the posts of Chief of the Industry and Infrastructure Division, Chief of the Perspective Planning Division and Chief of the Planning Coordination Division.
Notified in 2022, the common written examination was conducted on 13 July 2023, with 228 candidates appearing.
Each post carries a basic monthly pay of more than ₹1.25 lakh and ranks among the highest technical positions filled through the PSC.
Rank lists were published on 31 May 2025, based on the marks awarded for the remaining answers along with interview marks.
One candidate was subsequently appointed as Chief of the Industry and Infrastructure Division, another received an advice memo for appointment in a different division, while the third rank list remained pending owing to proceedings before the Kerala Administrative Tribunal.
But now, it has come to light that despite the omission, the commission went ahead with the selection process.
According to the PSC, the lapse occurred during the On-Screen Marking (OSM) process, when answers to questions numbered nine to 18 were not forwarded to evaluators through the digital valuation system.
Consequently, responses to those 10 questions were not assessed for any of the 228 candidates.
The commission described the omission as an error in the evaluation process, saying the answers were never assigned to examiners during digital valuation. Only after the lapse came to light did the PSC acknowledge the mistake and announce that all answer scripts would be re-evaluated and fresh rank lists would be published.
The revised lists could alter the rankings as well as the appointment recommendations already made.
Also Read: Kerala PSC exam aspirant’s hi-tech cheating attempt
Ironically, the error did not surface through the Kerala PSC’s internal checks or audit mechanisms.
Instead, it was uncovered after two candidates began questioning the marks awarded in the examination.
Soon after the rank lists were published, several candidates sought copies of their evaluated answer scripts.
The PSC, however, delayed providing the documents for months.
Two candidates — VS Jayalal and K Shyam Krishnan — sought access to their evaluated scripts after expressing doubts regarding the marks awarded.
They persisted with the request, invoking the Right to Information Act. Even after the application was rejected, they continued the legal battle through the appellate process.
With the possibility of intervention by the State Information Commission, the PSC eventually released the answer script. A scrutiny of the document revealed a startling omission — answers to questions nine to 18 had not been evaluated.
They then approached the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, prompting wider attention to the issue.
Following media reports and the legal challenge, the PSC conducted a preliminary verification and confirmed that the omission was not limited to a single answer sheet. The same 10 questions had remained unevaluated in the scripts of all 228 candidates who appeared for the examination.
Also Read: Kerala minister rejects bribe for PSC membership charge
Candidates argue that the omitted questions were not insignificant.
According to them, the unevaluated descriptive answers accounted for a substantial portion of the written examination.
As the recruitment involved only a small number of vacancies and candidates were separated by narrow margins, even modest variations in marks could potentially alter the order of merit.
They contend that evaluation of the omitted answers may affect not only rankings but also eligibility for interviews, advice memos and appointments.
Several candidates have therefore maintained that the recruitment process requires complete reconsideration after fresh evaluation.
By the time the error surfaced publicly, one candidate had already been appointed as Chief of the Industry and Infrastructure Division.
Arun J Prathap, who secured the first rank in that category, assumed charge in June 2025 after receiving appointment advice from the PSC.
This appointment in particular came under scrutiny as he had earlier been associated with a Left-affiliated service organisation.
In another category, an advice memo had already been issued to the top-ranked candidate.
Since litigation has been pending concerning the third category, appointments there had not progressed further.
Amid criticism that politically connected candidates benefited from the flawed evaluation process, the PSC has stated that any decision regarding existing appointments will ultimately depend upon directions issued by the Kerala Administrative Tribunal after considering the revised rank lists.
The controversy has now taken a political turn, with KPCC member JS Akhil approaching the state government seeking a Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) investigation into the entire selection process and the appointments already made.
In a detailed representation submitted to the Chief Minister, Home Minister and Vigilance Director Manoj Abraham, the complainant alleged that the rank list was vitiated by serious irregularities that warrant a criminal investigation.
The complaint points to the revelation that 10 descriptive questions carrying 58 out of the total 100 marks were left unevaluated.
Describing the omission as too significant to be dismissed as a technical error, the complainant alleged that the irregularity had the effect of materially altering the rank list and conferring an unfair advantage on selected candidates.
The complaint also questioned the credibility of the PSC’s ongoing internal vigilance inquiry, arguing that an in-house probe would be inadequate to uncover any larger conspiracy or possible abuse of official position. It sought a comprehensive investigation by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau into the evaluation process, preparation of the rank list, and the appointments that followed.
Meanwhile, the fresh development has widened into a larger political and administrative controversy, with appointments made during the previous Left Democratic Front (LDF) government’s tenure now coming under renewed scrutiny.
The Planning Board episode has revived demands for a closer examination of several earlier high-profile PSC recruitments, including those to the Kerala Administrative Service (KAS), Deputy Superintendent of Police (DySP) and Assistant Information Officer posts made during a decade of Left government.
These selections had previously been challenged before courts and had also attracted allegations regarding the preparation of rank lists and evaluation procedures. The PSC has consistently denied any irregularities in those recruitments.
The latest controversy has acquired added significance because the PSC itself acknowledged that answer sheets in the Planning Board selection were not fully evaluated before the rank list was published, and appointments had already begun.
While the Commission has ordered a fresh evaluation to rectify the lapse, its admission has put
questions of fairness, transparency and public confidence are central to the ongoing debate.
(Edited by Majnu Babu).
