Thiruvananthapuram: The Kerala Administrative Service (KAS) examination, conducted by the Kerala Public Service Commission (PSC) soon after the LDF government assumed office, has also come under a cloud amid mounting allegations of political interference in the preparation of question papers, evaluation of answer scripts and the interview process. A complaint highlighting the alleged irregularities has now been submitted to the chief minister.

The preliminary examination, attended by around 4.5 lakh candidates, was conducted using the OMR system. However, citing the inability of OMR machines to process nearly 12,000 answer sheets, the PSC had these papers evaluated directly by 21 of its officials. Although the commission received several complaints about the procedure, no follow-up action was initiated.

Similar allegations of irregularities surfaced regarding the 2020 KAS examination, which was held soon after the controversial police constable recruitment examination scam. However, despite the allegations, the PSC did not order an inquiry at that time either.

Instead, acting on a written request from the then PSC secretary, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against members of a UDF-affiliated organisation in the Secretariat who had flagged the irregularities. The promotions of two officials were withheld, while another, despite having retired months ago, is yet to receive his pension. 

Two of those who faced disciplinary action are currently serving as additional private secretaries to UDF ministers and they are also among those who have now sought a fresh probe into the alleged irregularities in the KAS examination.

The complaints received by the chief minister against the PSC are expected to be examined separately, with those relating to the KAS examination likely to come under specific scrutiny.

Crucial PSC meet amid probe buzz
A crucial meeting of the Kerala Public Service Commission (PSC) is set to be held on Monday, even as the state government prepares to order an investigation into the allegations against the commission.

The meeting assumes significance as members are likely to raise objections to the PSC chairman's decision to reassign a probe into the alleged irregularities in the appointment of the Planning Board chief. At its previous meeting, the commission had decided to have the inquiry conducted by its internal vigilance wing. However, the PSC chairman later overruled that decision and reassigned the probe to the Controller of Examinations.

Though all PSC members are LDF nominees, there are indications that some are unhappy with the recent developments. Allegations of nepotism in appointments within the commission are also likely to figure in the discussions.