Editor,
Through the columns of your esteemed daily, I wish to draw attention to discrepancies in the Arunachal Pradesh Staff Selection Board’s (APSSB) recruitment process, particularly in the preparation and handling of waiting lists for various examinations.
As the APSSB prepares for its 2025 competitive exams, it is crucial that issues from past years be acknowledged and rectified. In the Combined Graduate Level Examination (CGLE) conducted last year, for instance, waiting lists for record keeper and UDC posts were merged under one category. However, in the Combined Higher Secondary Level Examination (CHSLE), posts such as storekeeper and LDC were listed separately. This inconsistency has caused confusion among candidates.
To cite a few examples:
- For the JSA post, 4 candidates were selected and 2 were placed on the waiting list.
- For 18 APST posts of storekeeper and UDC, only 1 APST candidate was waitlisted.
- For 3 UR posts, 3 non-APST UR candidates were on the list.
- The librarian post had no waiting list at all.
- For the stenographer post (26 APST + 6 UR), only 1 candidate from each category was waitlisted.
- Curiously, record keeper (with just one seat) had two candidates waitlisted, whereas LDC (with 20 APST and 4 UR seats) had only one APST and one UR candidate.
There seems to be no consistent ratio or transparent criteria for preparing waiting lists. In one case, a candidate who cleared both written and skill tests was allotted the record keeper post due to a slightly younger age, but was ineligible to fill LDC vacancies later created by resignations because the waiting list had already been exhausted due to its limited size.
Even more concerning is the lack of communication from the APSSB. Waiting list candidates are not informed when selected candidates resign. Instead, they must contact selected candidates and visit departments in person, make enquiries, and request forwarding letters, instead of adding unnecessary stress after already undergoing a rigorous selection process.
Candidates on waiting lists are not just statistics; they are individuals who have invested years of effort, hope, and preparation. To be repeatedly forced to reappear for exams due to administrative gaps is both discouraging and unfair.
I sincerely urge the APSSB to clarify the criteria used for preparing waiting lists, and apply consistent and transparent practices across all recruitment examinations. Proactively notify waiting list candidates when vacancies arise. Also, collaborate with departments to ensure smooth and timely release and joining procedures.
The APSSB exists to serve the aspirants. It must prioritize transparency, fairness, and empathy, especially toward those candidates who remain in prolonged uncertainty, despite being eligible and deserving.
Tablechair