Gujarat High Court Demands Original Arthashastra Text in GPSC Exam Controversy
The Gujarat High Court has issued a directive to the Gujarat Public Service Commission (GPSC), ordering it to produce the original text of Kautilya's Arthashastra, specifically the first English translation published in 1915. This order follows a heated courtroom exchange regarding the correctness of an answer in a GPSC examination.
GPSC's Failure to Provide Original Edition
During a recent hearing, GPSC failed to present the original edition of the book and instead submitted only a PDF copy. The commission also stated that it was unable to identify the source of this PDF. Justice Nirzar Desai criticized GPSC for being stubborn and egoistic, accusing it of not accepting its blunder in this matter.
Since no original book was produced, the court raised serious questions about the authenticity of the text used by GPSC to frame the exam question. The court directed the GPSC secretary to file an affidavit addressing key concerns. These include whether it is permissible to frame questions from a book when the physical copy is unavailable and the PDF source is unknown, and how the authenticity of such a book should be determined if this practice is allowed.
Background of the Exam Dispute
The controversy stems from a question in the 2025 GPSC exam that asked candidates to evaluate two statements about Kautilya's Arthashastra: first, that the book was written in Sanskrit, and second, that it deals with economics. The options provided were:
- A: Only one
- B: Only two
- C: One and two both
- D: None of the above
A candidate, who fell just one mark short of qualifying for the second round of the recruitment process, challenged GPSC's official answer key. She argued that her answer of 'C' was correct, but GPSC disagreed, leading to the legal dispute.
Conflicting Sources and Court Directives
The candidate's lawyers submitted that textbooks from GCERT and NCERT supported her answer. However, GPSC's counsel asserted that the question was framed directly from the original 1915 English translation of Arthashastra. The court has now directed GPSC to disclose the identity of the paper setter who relied on this so-called "original text," especially since GPSC's answer contradicts the school textbooks it prescribes as reference material for candidates.
Additionally, the court questioned how candidates could reasonably be expected to refer to century-old books and sought a reply by March 20. This reply must address whether the Arthashastra is widely available to the public and, if a physical copy exists, which specific edition was used to select the question.
This case highlights significant issues in exam-setting practices and the reliance on obscure or inaccessible sources, potentially impacting the fairness and transparency of competitive recruitment processes in Gujarat.
