Paper leaks in Rajasthan, a state with a high unemployment rate, are just the visible manifestation of much deeper systemic problems, including long and frequent internet shutdowns and infrastructural issues.
—
EARLY this year, the Public Examinations Prevention of Unfair Means Bill of 2024 was tabled in the Parliament to curb the repeated menace of paper leaks in recruitment examinations.
But state examinations and agencies remain out of the Bill’s ambit despite figures that indicate an alarming surge in paper leaks, especially in states such as Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Telangana and Uttar Pradesh.
The Union government conducts various examinations through recruitment agencies such as the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), Staff Selection Commission (SSC) and the Railway Recruitment Boards (RRBs).
When the Union government has the capacity to conduct examinations in a seamless manner on a much larger scale, what forbids Rajasthan from following suit?
The examination is conducted annually and uniformly with a fixed number of vacancies. But when it comes to state examinations such as the Rajasthan Eligibility Examination for Teachers (REET), Rajasthan Administrative Services (RAS) and Rajasthan Judicial Services examination (RJS), paper leaks are frequent, because of which the examination cycle extends up to many years, leading to irregular vacancies and post fulfilments.
The increase in paper leaks holds implications for the state government machinery as well, because government offices operate on minimum staff due to delays in the recruitment process.
When the Union government has the capacity to conduct examinations in a seamless manner on a much larger scale, what forbids the state from following suit? What are the technological, institutional, mechanical and other factors restricting the states?
The recurrent postponements in recruitment examinations leads to anxiety, stress and frustration among the candidates who appeared for the examinations.
Many students are agonised by financial constraints that restrict them from paying examination fees, travel expenses and coaching fees for re-attempts of the examination, leading to unequal opportunities for the youth from the lower socio-economic strata of society.
It ultimately dissuades future aspirants from preparing for such examinations, forcing them towards jobs in the private sector or migration to other cities. The state is then deprived of competent administrators, teachers, professors and judges, resulting in a brain drain from cities in the state.
Another flaw in the recruitment methodology arises from the government’s practice of infrequent and delayed recruitments, rather than conducting annual recruitments. This approach poses a significant threat to the right to livelihood of the educated unemployed in the state.A larger youth population can prove to be an invaluable asset to the nation’s growth, only if its potential is realised.
Logistical challenges
Between 2011-22, there were 26 instances of paper leak cases in Rajasthan, leading to an increase in logistical and infrastructural costs for the government incurred in printing papers, allotting centres of examination, appointing examiners and nominating a panel of question setters for the examination.
Rajasthan has been ineffective in its policies to restrict the connivance of students with coaching centres and printing agencies to help them crack the entrance examinations for hefty sums of money.
Paper leak incidents turn these processes into sunk costs as re-conducting the same examination leads to a loss of revenue for the government and is an injustice to the honest taxpayer’s money.
Instances of paper leaks further exacerbate the problem of unemployment for the youth, constituting one of the major factors leading Rajasthan to top the ladder of unemployment according to a report by the Periodic Labour Force Survey.
Violation of basic rights of students
The vicious cycle of examinations is an unending ordeal for the youth. It also has a pernicious impact on students who are struggling from financial constraints or have only one earning family member and lose hope of any employment to break their cycle of poverty.
It violates Articles 19(1)(g) (right to practice any trade, profession or business) and 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Indian Constitution which reads the right to livelihood as an integral part of right to life as held by the Supreme Court in Olga Tellis & Ors. versus Bombay Municipal Corporation, 1985.
Another unsettling aspect is the problem of dummy candidates in examinations, which is violative of the rights enshrined under Article 14 (right to equality) and Article 16 (prohibition of discrimination in public employment).
Such repeated incidents need to be curbed by efficient implementation of the rules in place and by using technological assistance to ensure that no photograph is morphed or tampered with during recruitment examinations.
Also read: Free speech underpins all other freedoms
In the case of Nidhi Kaim & Anr. versus State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors., the Supreme Court reiterated that such malpractices tarnish the credibility and reverence attached to these examinations.
Instances of paper leaks further exacerbate the problem of unemployment for the youth, constituting one of the major factors leading Rajasthan to top the ladder of unemployment.
The state has been ineffective in its policies to restrict the connivance of students with coaching centres and printing agencies to help them crack the entrance examinations for hefty sums of money.
Unjust and disproportionate internet shutdowns
States such as Rajasthan frequently rely on internet shutdowns to conceal their administrative failure of conducting an examination, which is in contravention of Article 19(1)(a) (right to freedom of speech and expression), Article 19(1)(g) and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution as the right to access the internet has been read as an integral part of Article 21 in Faheema Shirin versus State of Kerala.
In the case of Anuradha Bhasin versus Union of India, the court held that internet restrictions imposed by the government should be lawful, necessary and proportionate. However, the restrictions imposed by the State sometimes extend even up to 12 hours, making it unjust and disproportionate.
In today’s digital age, curbing internet services under the guise of preventing cheating in examinations has resulted in significant disruptions across the business, medical facilities and banking sectors. These closures can result in losses amounting to as much as ₹800 crore to the state within a month.
Other states do not resort to frequent internet shutdowns to ensure the examinations are conducted without students seeking recourse to unfair methods. Rajasthan, by making such distinction, violates the requirements of a reasonable nexus and intelligible differentia under Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution.
In the case of State of West Bengal versus Anwar Ali Sarkar, three tests were laid down to determine the validity of governmental actions, especially those involving discrimination or unequal treatment: the reasonable nexus test, intelligible differentia and the proportionality test.
However, this distinction cannot be justified by the government based on clear distinguishing factors and the principle of reasonable connection because it could lead to reduced or unequal employment and educational opportunities for individuals from Rajasthan compared to those from other states.
Curbing internet services under the guise of preventing cheating in examinations has resulted in significant disruptions across the various sectors such as businesses, medical facilities, and banking sectors.
It is also in the transgression of Article 41 of the Constitution which makes the government accountable for the security of the right to work. Article 6 and 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights bestow a duty on the government to secure citizens’ right to work according to their choice.
These arbitrary internet shutdowns have an excessive adverse impact on the underprivileged segment of society as internet bans are restricted to mobile internet while broadband services remain operational.
According to data from the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, 97.07 percent of Indians rely on mobile phones or mobile internet cards for internet access and do not have access to broadband connections.
Consequently, internet shutdowns affect marginalised groups to a greater extent, while having a lesser impact on more privileged sections of the population who can access the internet through broadband connections.
Hence, it falls foul of reasonable classification and intelligible differentia under Article 14 of the Constitution. Another difficulty created by this arbitrary classification is that most big institutions such as coaching centres that are involved in paper leaks rely on broadband services which are exempted from the ban.
The government is wrong in imposing an extreme measure curtailing liberties of citizens through internet shutdowns without exhausting other proportionate means to solve the menace of cheating in recruitment examinations.
The Supreme Court in Chhaya Rani Sharma versus Union of India & Ors. directed the state government to ensure strict adherence to the guidelines laid in Anuradha Bhasin and acknowledged the present conduct of the government in violation of Articles 19(1)(a) and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.
A continuous delay or cancellation of government recruitment examinations strikes at the root of Articles 14, 16, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the citizens.
The Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. versus Rajesh P.U Puthuvalnikathu & Anr., recognised the concern that in the aftermath of any examination fraud, the classification of honest and dishonest beneficiaries might result in the merging or intersection of two unequal classes, thereby contravening Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
Also read: Why the Indian State’s increasing reliance on internet shutdowns is problematic
The Rajasthan High Court, in the case of Dhirendra Singh Rajpurohit versus State of Rajasthan stated that the suspension of internet services during public examinations does not qualify as a public emergency under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution.
A petition was filed to question the constitutionality of the suspension Order, arguing it violated Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. However, despite assurances from the Rajasthan government to the high court that such internet shutdowns would not occur again during recruitment examinations, they were soon re-imposed.
A comprehensive roadmap for the future
To curb the repeated instances of cheating in recruitment examinations and internet shutdowns, the states need to come up with an efficient mechanism to protect the bright future of the youth.
The state should incorporate the use of technology to ensure efficient administrative surveillance in conducting examinations.
The government is wrong in imposing an extreme measure curtailing liberties of citizens through internet shutdowns without exhausting other proportionate means to solve the menace of cheating in recruitment examinations.
The use of fingerprints and eye scanners at examination centres can effortlessly restrict dummy candidates from writing the examinations. A rapid response team equipped with the necessary technology to detect and address instances of cheating promptly will minimise the need for pre-emptive internet shutdowns.
An alternative set of question papers should be kept ready in case any instance of a paper leak occurs, to ensure that examinations are not postponed.
The pattern of the examinations should be improved, and they should be conducted annually for fixed vacancies. The current legislation enacted by the legislature to curb cheating does not impose any liability on coaching institutions.
Considering the active role coaching institutions often play on the issue of paper leaks, this oversight needs to be addressed. Although anti-cheating laws exist, the government’s primary shortcoming lies in their implementation.
While the government undertakes measures to curb malpractices during examinations, they must ensure that the least inconvenience is caused to citizens.
An effective compliance to the guidelines laid by the Supreme Court in Anuradha Bhasin is obligatory. Instead of imposing a complete internet blackout, more proportionate measures such as the use of internet jammers in examination centres should be used.
However, if circumstances make such imposition inevitable then it should be done by giving concrete reasons to the public well in advance.
