Monday, November 25, 2013

Declaration of Revised / recast result of the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination for promotion to the cadre of PS Gr B 2012 held on 3rd June 2012.

Directorate vide memo No. F.NO A-34013/03/2012- DE dated 22nd November 2013 has declared revised result of LDCE for the promotion to the cadre of PS Gr. B held on 3/6/2012. To view the copy of memo, please  CLICK HERE  . Only following two candidates additionally selected after recasting the entire evaluation process. 

Shri R. J. Sonawale (SC) Maharashatra Circle selected from IP Line and Shri Hanuman S.Visen of UP Circle additionally selected from General Line. Their absorption is against existing /future vacancies from respective quotas. 

CHQ congratulate the officers and wishes them best luck in their future assignment. 


  1. Dear All,
    Actually, after inviting comments/representations from the candidates who have participated in the examination, several representations have been stated to be received at Dte. But these representations seem to be not taken into consideration by Dte and they stuck into their stand only. For example, few of the suggestions send is reproduced below for information of the members/candidates which are fit/unfit to be considered may be discussed in this blog. (Note : Any of these representation was not at all considered by Dte)
    Qn No 44 & 45 (Paper I-Series C) -As per PLI Dte notification No 25-3/2003-LI dt 17-1-2012, the maximum sum assured under PLI/RPLI were changed from 10L/3L to 20/5 Lakhs. Hence out of 4 options given in answers, 20L for Qn NO 44 and 5L for Qn No 45 are the correct one. Since this limit is came to effect from the date of notification(17-1-2012), there is no ambiguity in the answers and hence these Qn should not be deleted at all but to award marks to those who have marked the correct options (20 L/5L). There is no ambiguity in respect of Non Medical category as there is no answer ( 1L for PLI and 25000 for RPLI) available under answers to these questions. Hence Dte instead of deleting the questions, might have award 2 marks to those candidates selected the correct options(20L/5L).
    (II) Qn NO 20( Paper I -Series C) : As per SB Man Vol I published in IP website,(Page 46) there is ambiguity in atleast 3 answers (Options B,C&D) Hence this question is fit for deletion. But this was not deleted by Dte despite request.
    (iii) Qn No 77(Paper I- series C) As per IPO act 1898, the definition, indicates that whoever employed in the PO itself or doing postal business on behalf of the PO are called as officer of the post office. As such, atleast 2 answers (Option A&D) are correct. Hence this question should have been deleted or else, marks should have been given to those who marked A or D as their answer.
    (iv) Qn NO 109(Series C) As per PO man Vol V , the outward office of exchange makes up mails for offices of exchange of other countries and exchanges mails with offices in other countries. Hence there is no ambiguity in the answers and option D is the only correct answer. If Option A is considered, it is only an half of the definition and similar is the option B also. As such instead of deleting this question, Dte should have given the mark to those candidates who have marked the correct option D.
    (v)Qn NO 33(Paper I Series C) - As per SB Man Vol I Published in website(page No 62) the SB documents from HO to SO are sent duly entered in SB-27. Further it is published in the vol itself that SB-104 (list of documents are meant to be sent from SO to HO and SB-22 are from HO to SBCO. Hence there is no ambiguity in any anser but option C is the correct answer. As such this Qn should not have been deleted by Dte, but to award marks to those candidates who have opted the answer as SB-27 to this question.
    The above points are not an exhaustive but there might have some other confusions/no confusion in some other answers. I request all the candidates/members to go through the above and comment.

    1. Dear Friend, There is a crisis of Subject Matter Expert in this department. No officer is willing to be SME. They are only sincere with Field Performance and over burdened with Project Management. No committee had been constituted by Directorate to look into the matter. The past performance of DE section is known to all. You could discuss your views only in the court of justice. Who will go through all these representation? It is not possible without constitution of Committee. Since, SME is not available with department. They cannot constitute committee. As a departmental employee, you have limited options. Do not listen to your soul. Please listen and follow the instructions of Officer. Think positive. SME is not available, but activist is available in Department. They will fight against this injustice. Wait and watch or be a part of this fight......