Letters

The MPSC fiasco

After all the allegations made against the Commission on the recently concluded MCS exams, kudos to the commission for being able to declare the final list of selected candidates within a span of 7 days! Most examinations require a minimum of one month or more to do the same! Through this letter, we would like to highlight an odd coincidence, wherein the names of three rank-holders in the said list were, in fact, reflected in the list of rejected candidates, dated 16.11.2017.
Elaborating on the oddity of the entire state of affairs, we will take you through a brief but succinct list of events that unfolded. MPSC had advertised for the MCS post on 24.07.2017 vide letter no. MPSC/ADVT-38/1/2017-2018/21. Subsequently, a list of rejected (proposed) candidates, dated 16.11.2017, was notified vide notice no. MPSC/EX-C/23/2017-2018/28. As per the usual recruitment process, these rejected candidates were to file their representations by 30.11.2017. An additional list of rejected candidates, dated 28.11.2017, was notified vide notice no. MPSC/EX-C/23/2017-2018/72, wherein this lot was to file their representations by 07.12.2017. Thereafter, after having considered and scrutinized the said representations, MPSC, on 29.12.2017, vide notice no. MPSC/D -108/2/2017-2018/16, put forth the eligibility list, stating and we quote, “The representations filed by 106 (one hundred and six) candidates have been placed before the Commission, 54 (fifty four) candidates have been found to be eligible and hence accepted”.
Here’s what’s bizarre – The names of rank-holders 4, 19 and 37 of the list of selected MCS candidates, featured on the list of rejected candidates, dated 16.11.2017. However, these names did not reflect on the Eligibility List dated 29.12.2017, presuming they were amongst the 106 candidates who had filed their representations. Then, wouldn’t it be correctly concluded that their eligibility for the MCS exam ended there? But lo, a fresh rejection list was notified by MPSC, dated 13.06.2018, vide Notice no. MPSC/EX-C/23/2017-2018/82, wherein representations, if any, were to be filed by 27.06.2018. In this very notice, the names of these specific rank-holders do not feature anymore! But the strangeness doesn’t end there. The subsequent Eligibility List, dated 02.07.2018, notified vide notice no. MPSC/D-103/2/2017-2018/162, does not reflect their names either!
Two primary questions remain – the Commission must have been ready and all set with the list of candidates who were to appear for the preliminary exam, on or before 19.01.2018, presumably. Why, then, did the Commission publish an additional list of rejected candidates, dated 13.06.2018, when the process of filtering the candidates had already been completed?
And for the substantial part, nowhere on the eligibility lists, dated 29.12.2017 and 02.07.2018 respectively, do the names of rank-holders 4, 19 and 37 appear. How, then, did the Commission include in the final list of selectees (MCS), dated 29.04.2021, the names of the said rank-holders whose names have, not once, reflected in the eligibility lists but, in fact, appeared on the list of rejected candidates, dated 16.11.2017? Is this, what one calls, breezing through the procedure of examinations, which, by the way, include a written examination as well as an interview? Not to mention, one must be ‘qualified’ and ‘selected’ in order to take the examinations.
Oh, the ire the Commission receives till date, is everything but undeserving!
Name withheld

Related Articles

Check Also
Close
Back to top button