The thousands of aspiring candidates writing their exams conducted by the Meghalaya Public Service Commission (MPSC) are in despair after the Commission came out with a second list of qualified candidates whose names did not feature in the earlier list. The Commission’s explanation is that there were questions that were wrongly added and because of which those candidates were wrongly marked. From its early days the MPSC was accused of nepotism as relatives of former chief ministers and other notables were selected while others with no political strings found themselves out in the cold. As expected, such backdoor entrants to the civil services have never stood out as officers able to hold their own and deliver governance; forget about good governance. If governance at the Block level is either absent or marred by mis-governance the fault lies with the Block Development Officers (BDO) who hardly move out of their offices to check out what’s happening at the field level when that is a priority. The reason why Meghalaya is faring so poorly in its human development indices is because there is no governance beyond the state capital and this is all too apparent for those who visit the rural areas of Meghalaya which till date live in a state of deprivation whether of good roads, health care, education et al. This is what happens when civil servants appointed are actually not cut out for the task at hand and take their positions as one of privilege; not of service .
Like other State Public Service Commissions the MPSC too derives its legitimacy from Article 315-323 of the Indian Constitution. It is an administrative body with the primary role of conducting examinations and interviews to recruit candidates for various services within the state’s civil administration. Each State Public Service Commission (SPCS) operates independently, ensuring recruitment processes adapt to the specific needs of each state. Although operating independently, SPSCs follow a structure and set of rules similar to the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), maintaining an effective standardization of public service recruitment processes across the country.
The MPSC should have been designed to function independently of executive control, as mandated by the Constitution. This independence is crucial for maintaining impartiality and ensuring that recruitment processes are conducted fairly and transparently. The question is whether the MPSC since its inception has been allowed to function independently of the executive when appointees to the Commission have always been selected by the government and their names forwarded to the governor for appointment. Times without number the members of the MPSC are also members of political parties and are drawn from the ruling party of the day. Experience and expertise have always been given short shrift. How then can the MPSC function independently? Its time to cleanse the MPSC of all politics once and for all.
