Editor,
Last night, the Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission released the marks of the recent civil service examination. After reviewing the score breakdown, it has become evident that many deserving aspirants fell out of the merit list not because of poor overall performance, but primarily due to large disparities in marks awarded for optional subjects and the interview stage.
Optional papers, once intended to test academic depth, now create an uneven playing field. Certain optional subjects consistently score above 400, while others rarely cross 250-280 even when candidates scored well in common papers. When all aspirants are competing for the same administrative roles, such variation in scoring patterns raises a serious question of fairness.
The interview stage presents another challenge. Differences of 80-100 marks between candidates, influenced by subjective perceptions, different boards, or varying levels of leniency and strictness, can dramatically affect rankings. This inconsistency undermines confidence in the evaluative process. As practiced in engineering and other professional examinations, interview marks should be nominal, which is sufficient to assess personality and suitability but not substantial enough to override written merit.
The unfortunate outcome is that many aspirants begin to blame their luck or doubt their ability, when the real issue lies in a system that no longer aligns with the principles of transparency, equity and meritocracy.
Several states, including our neighbouring state Assam, have already taken progressive steps by removing optional papers and adopting standardised frameworks. It may now be appropriate for Arunachal to consider similar reforms to ensure equal opportunity and restore trust in the recruitment process.
Civil services are meant to uphold justice, fairness, and accountability. The examination system selecting future officers must reflect those same values.
Aspirant