What do u people think about the people who reappear in the exams frequently
 

Well i have a simple thing that i wanted to share with people on CSS forum.
What do u guys think abt those people who pass css in their first year and join psp, DMG or FSP but are not satisfied with their group and then again give the exams and change their groups to whatever they want . Then out of these people some people again dont like their groups and sit in the exams again and most of the time the people who pass in their first attempt also pass in their second and third. This procedure of changing groups may not seem to be a big deal for the person who is passing the exams again and again but in real ir snatches away seats of three people, 1 in the first year and other two in next two years.
Now do u guys think that fpsc should make this law for every candidate who wants to repeat the exam that he or she should leave the job that they are on at that time and then re appear in the exam. What this will do is that it will reduce the ratio of the reaappearing candidates. And it will give chances to those unlucky candidates who might have wanted to join psp, dmg and fsp but were rejected due to limited seats.
Also the biggest concern is that most of the time this thing is done by females who are not satisfied wit their seats. Also most of these women leave the job after marriage due to various reasons. I am really sad at some of my frends who want to join some specific groups but are rejected while the peopel who get these position reappear frequently thus taking away more seats.
do u guys agree with me or is it just me who thinks like this . Also the quota system for females is also increasing i have heard , what do u guys think abt this ??

werent we taught to "try try try again"?? ;)
 

well to those first-timers who clear the written part AND the interview but miss allocation, it does appear a tad unjust (& terribly frustrating) that the ones who have prior experience of competitive exams (PCS, SPSC, mostly CSS) get better score/positions...(thanks to previous exposure & awareness of their strengths & weaknesses)

AND admittedly, the concentration of such um [I]dab hands [/I] ;) is increasing in the top 100.
for instance lets consider the example of CE-2011 result..many er non-first-timers
1. 26 MIAN MUHAMMD MUMTAZ HAYAT MANEKA (37th CTP officer)
2. 16 ARIFULLAH AWAN (KPK PSC)
3. 22 MUHAMMAD USMAN KHALID (CSS 200X (presumably)
4. 28 RAFIA HAIDER (CSS)
5. 70 NASRULLAH (CSS 2010)
etc

in CSS 2010 exam too, there were many such examples. Officers from 37th & 38th CTP improved their groups. [URL="http://www.cssforum.com.pk/css-datesheets-results/css-result-datesheet/css-2010-exam/49605-syedah-ramallah-ali-2nd-css-2010-a.html"]the second position holder was a PCS/PMS officer[/URL]

BUT all this just adds to the competitiveness of the exam :dd without making it unfair (or so i think)..
so lets not begrudge them their hardwork & success :)

[QUOTE=Wali Ahad;437991]well to those first-timers who clear the written part AND the interview but miss allocation, it does appear a tad unjust (& terribly frustrating) that the ones who have prior experience of competitive exams (PCS, SPSC, mostly CSS) get better score/positions...(thanks to previous exposure & awareness of their strengths & weaknesses)

AND admittedly, the concentration of such um [I]dab hands [/I] ;) is increasing in the top 100.
for instance lets consider the example of CE-2011 result..many er non-first-timers
1. 26 MIAN MUHAMMD MUMTAZ HAYAT MANEKA (37th CTP officer)
2. 16 ARIFULLAH AWAN (KPK PSC)
3. 22 MUHAMMAD USMAN KHALID (CSS 200X (presumably)
4. 28 RAFIA HAIDER (CSS)
5. 70 NASRULLAH (CSS 2010)
etc

in CSS 2010 exam too, there were many such examples. Officers from 37th & 38th CTP improved their groups. [URL="http://www.cssforum.com.pk/css-datesheets-results/css-result-datesheet/css-2010-exam/49605-syedah-ramallah-ali-2nd-css-2010-a.html"]the second position holder was a PCS/PMS officer[/URL]

BUT all this just adds to the competitiveness of the exam :dd without making it unfair (or so i think)..
so lets not begrudge them their hardwork & success :)[/QUOTE]

True but one thing i cant understand is that due to high competition and repitition in punjab, its really difficult to get allocation even if anybody passes the exam. so there should be some limitations for the ones who are repeating the exams.
on the other hand most of the ladies do leave the jobs after marriage. three of them i know personally.all three were in fsp.

ok :)) what would you recommend then? deduction of (20 or so) marks for the repeaters? :dd

[QUOTE=Wali Ahad;438003]ok :)) what would you recommend then? deduction of (20 or so) marks for the repeaters? :dd[/QUOTE]

well i have seen people who acquire some jobs in css and then they try to improve their job by reatking the exams. What there should be is that they should ask that person to leave that job and that job should be given to some of the guys who missed the oppurtunity just because of that person. on the other hand it may increase the number of seats too. but they should leave the job and then they should retake. As by followng the current system they are taking away two seats.
Well its just my opinion and my opinion doesnt really matter . :)

um i think you have mistakenly assumed that 2 seats are lost.
once a probationer/officer improves his group (from IRS to PSP,for instance) his seat is vacated. which is then announced as a vacancy that year

[QUOTE=Wali Ahad;438010]um i think you have mistakenly assumed that 2 seats are lost.
once a probationer/officer improves his group (from IRS to PSP,for instance) his seat is vacated. which is then announced as a vacancy that year[/QUOTE]

what if a person leaves his/her seat after STP? Is that seat still considered vacant and announced?