What does credibility mean? How does one maintain one’s credibility? Is it about maintaining one’s image and position, or is it about accepting the wrong and doing the right thing?
How do the APPSSCE members maintain the commission’s credibility? What is the right thing for the APPSSCE to do? Why is the verdict in the APPSSCE case taking ages to come?
Does not anyone value the constraints the vacancies have on the administrative functioning of the state? Why are the government and the intellectuals not showing any sign of interest in the matter? Are they even having discussions on it? Is no one interested in the wellness of the state? Are all the intellectuals in the state self-satisfied? Is this fight only for the aspirants? Does it have no bearing on the future of the state?
The lacklustre attitude they have shown puts me in doubt about all its selection process. With this attitude of the state and the intellectuals, I don’t understand what it’s criterion would be for selection of young candidates who are to replace them and represent them in the future.
Are they waiting for the judgment of the court? If so, the court may seem to have failed them. The court here, it seems, is lacking the will to provide justice for its dependents with the state at large.
However, this wait has been forever. Why is the court taking so long to conclude with all the evidence it has on a case that is of high state importance? This, thus, casts serious doubts on the credibility of the court. If this is the attitude towards a case that is very time sensitive and important, it surely has lost if it is not losing its credibility.
The credibility can be maintained by providing justice to all dependents, which is fair in the sense that it considers all the evidences, ie, past verdict and present facts, maintaining its integrity, immune from influence of self-interest lobbyists, and maintaining transparency in its whole process.
Lastly, the court needs to show its will to be accountable. It can only be achieved by proper and timely implementation of its verdict.
Since the case is time sensitive and many aspirants are crossing the upper age limit for examination, a fair verdict without any more delay would be the right justice for the present. This certainly would improve people’s faith in the respected court and help maintain the credibility of the institution, which is often questioned.
It is also the duty of the people to accept the verdict in full faith. However, one has every right to appeal to the higher courts if they think they are wronged.