Many unscrupulous “other optional subject aspirants (other than commerce)” are bandwagon (ing) on the name of deprived candidates. We should refrain from making a travesty of the democratic process. These people, should not believe that they can direct the juggernaut with their malicious intent. Exacerbating the situation hold no good for anyone. Someone’s failure (who are scoring less), is not epiphenomena of the copy-pasting or the error. They should refrain from creating a cacophony in the air, thereby obfuscating the situation.
Let the subjects, with genuine grievances, raise their voice and demand. Refrain from diluting it by inoculating it with selfish intentions. Let it get truncate it at early. Let both the Beleaguered commission and the aggrieved come into an early solution.
No one wants the process of the exam to fall into an abyss. That’s why for the concerned optional subject (Commerce) it is requested that instead of equivocations and dharnas; please do proper research on your question paper for proving your point. Come up with a concrete analogy between the question paper and the syllabus, and explain and prove how the claimed questions were out of syllabus. Then, put it in front of the commission. It should be done ASAP (say within 10 days) aggrieved candidates can take the help of HoDs of RGU who already has supported the claim in writing.
Though, I am with genuinely aggrieved optional candidates. Albeit, I personally, would not take the argument that the “whole process was/is an error” to be an axiomatic dictum. Also, I don’t thrive on being a Schadenfreude.