| Font Size |
The writ petition (no 39/2010), filed by Bangalore-based software professional Harsha Shettigar, has included “Convenor of CAT 2009, IIM-Ahmedabad”, “Director of IIM-Bangalore” and “Principal Secretary, Union of India, Ministry of Human Resources Development, New Delhi” as respondents.
The petition was filed on January 2 and is presently pending for admission before the principal bench of the High Court. It states: “Even though the method of computerised test is claimed to be foolproof by the respondents, there were several cases of cheating, mismanagement, leaks, rampant reboots, viruses and general all-round mismanagement.”
The petitioner pointed out how differences were created when the exams had started across centres at different timings, which led to “less than ideal testing conditions”.
He added that the questions were repeated from one slot to another, and questions that had appeared in previous years’ exams were repeated in CAT 2009.
He further said the candidates who appeared from the second day had the advantage as they “mugged up” questions from previous years and so, those tested on the first day were meted out “injustice”.
It also said the questions were “all over the Internet in the CAT window period”.
The petition appealed that the court should direct the respondents to “cancel the earlier CAT 2009 and re-conduct the test in paper-pencil format”.
In October 2009, a division bench of the Gujarat High Court had dismissed a PIL filed by Babu Vaghela of Ahmedabad challenging the online CAT format, apprehending tampering with the results.
The bench comprising of then Chief Justice K S Radhakrishnan and Justice Akil Kureshi had stated: “We find no reason to entertain this PIL at the instance of a person who is unconnected with the Institute.”
Discuss this story on expressindia forums
|
|
The observation of the Gujarat High Court Bench %u201CWe find no reason to entertain this PIL at the instance of a person who is unconnected with the Institute.%u201D appears against the spirit of public interest litigation. Errors can occur in the judgement and hence, in the interest of justice, curative arrangement should be made available at the same High Court by a larger Bench & without going to the Supreme Court. That should help reduce cases at Supreme Court level and a concerned common man, having limited resources, can get justice for people at large.
Considering the irregularities, chaos and mess created in the on line IIM CAT 2009, UPA Govt, before it is compelled to do, should cancel entire Test this year. Let it be On Line BUT with a provision to get result IMMEDIATELY on completion of the test. Leave apart two months time that IIMs want, they do not even one day to declare result for On Line Test. Hopefully, at Karnataka High Court Rule of Law shall apply. I was the one who had filed PIL at Gujarat High Court. I have taken CAT 2009 after PIL.