Editor,
There’s an old saying often attributed to Benjamin Franklin: “Justice delayed is justice denied.” In the realm of public recruitment, this could very well be rewritten as: “Results delayed are opportunities denied.” The Meghalaya Public Service Commission (MPSC), an institution entrusted with selecting the best talent for the state’s public services, now finds itself facing an uncomfortable but unavoidable question: Why has the recruitment process slowed down so drastically?
Not very long ago, the Commission demonstrated that efficiency was possible. Under the previous leadership, the JDA (Junior Divisional Accountant) mains examination results were declared to approximately three and a half months. The process, while not perfect, at least respected the time and aspirations of the candidates.
Contrast this with the present situation. The JDA mains examination this year has crossed five months without results. Even more perplexing is the case of the Assistant Engineer examination, which was purely MCQ-based and involved only a few thousand candidates, yet the result took more than 4 months to be declared. This raises a simple but critical question: What has changed? If a process that once took three months now takes five or more, one of two things must be true: either the system has become more complex, or the system has become less efficient.
As Albert Einstein famously remarked, “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” Recruitment examinations, particularly those involving objective papers and limited candidates, should not stretch indefinitely. For the candidates, these delays are not just administrative inconveniences. They are months of anxiety, lost preparation cycles, and uncertainty about their careers. Many aspirants plan their lives around these timelines — further studies, other examinations, or employment opportunities are all placed on hold while they wait for results that should reasonably have been declared much earlier. A Public Service Commission does not merely conduct examinations; it sets the tempo of governance recruitment in the state. When the tempo slows unnecessarily, it signals inefficiency to thousands of young aspirants.
The purpose of this letter is not to undermine the institution of the MPSC, which remains vital to the state’s administrative framework. Rather, it is to call for transparency and accountability. Therefore, the Chairman and Members of the Meghalaya Public Service Commission owe the public a clear explanation on:
(a) What factors have caused the needless delay in result declaration?
Have new evaluation procedures been introduced?
(b) Is there a shortage of examiners or administrative capacity within the Commission?
(c) Most importantly, what timeline reforms will be implemented to ensure future recruitments are not similarly delayed?
As Abraham Lincoln once said, “Public sentiment is everything.” Institutions that serve the public must also answer to the public. The youth of Meghalaya deserve a recruitment system that is efficient, predictable, and transparent. If the Commission could deliver results faster in the past, there is little justification for the present slowdown.
The Chairman and Members of the MPSC should therefore address these concerns openly through a public statement or forum, reassuring candidates that their time, effort, and aspirations are not being lost in bureaucratic inertia. After all, in the words of Peter Drucker, “Efficiency is doing things right; effectiveness is doing the right things.” The candidates of Meghalaya deserve both.
Yours etc.,
Name withheld on request,
Via email
Call for Separate Reservation Category for the Jaintia Tribe
Editor
Through your esteemed daily, I wish to express deep concern regarding the continued grouping of the Jaintia community with the Khasi under a single reservation category in Meghalaya.
The Jaintias are a distinct people with their own language, customs, traditional institutions, and historical legacy rooted in the former Jaintia Kingdom. While we share certain affinities with the Khasi community, administrative clubbing under one category overlooks demographic realities and risks political and institutional marginalisation of the smaller Jaintia population. Recent statements made by the VPP President in the Assembly have further heightened concerns about possible subsuming of our distinct identity within a broader majoritarian narrative.
Reservation policies must ensure not only opportunity but also equitable representation and protection of unique identities. In this context, I urge Jaintia leaders, civil society organisations, and intellectuals to seriously explore the available legal and constitutional frameworks to examine the feasibility of creating a separate reservation category for the Jaintia community. Provisions under the Constitution that safeguard tribal rights and ensure equality before law provide avenues for dialogue, review, and reform.
Such a move would not divide communities but would strengthen the plural and inclusive fabric of our state by acknowledging its internal diversity. Protecting identity through lawful and democratic means is essential for long-term harmony and balanced development.
I hope our leaders will take proactive and constructive steps in this direction.
Yours etc.,
Marbiang L Rymbai
Via email
The IoA Betrayal: Why Meghalaya’s “ILP – Like” Laws are a Historical Insult
Editor,
In 1948 the 25 Khasi States (Himas)signed the Instrument Of Accession (IOA) with a clear understanding : Our identity, land and customs would be sacrosanct. Fast forward to 2026 , and the sacred pact is being traded for a series of legislative ” alternatives ” that offer the shadow of protection without the substance. .
The Meghalaya Residents Safety and Security Act MRSSA and the proposed Immigration and Foreigners Act 2025 are being marketed as ” ILP Like ” solutions. However to the indigenous population these are not solutions, they are insults. While the Inner Line Permit ( ILP ) under the 1873 regulation provides a legal ” No Entry ” sign for those without permits ,The MRSSA is merely a digital guestbook .It registers visitors but lacks the constitutional “teeth ” to stop the relentless influx.
Look at our infiltration checkpoints without the ILP, places like Umling have become symbolic theatres. The Infiltration Branch is tasked with a ” wise check,” yet they are legally handcuffed. They can observe, but they cannot exclude. This administrative comedy is a direct betrayal of the IOA’s spirit. The State Government must stop ” exploring” weak alternatives and demand the real ILP. Anything less is a surrender of our birth right.
Yours etc.,
H.Umdor
Shillong-8
