The selection process of the Nagaland Public Service Commission for recruiting officers to the Nagaland civil and allied services has evolved over a period of time. Through past shortcomings and failures, the Commission has today set in place a system which is largely balanced and hence acceptable. The preliminary exam consisting of a general studies objective paper and the mains comprising of English and a General studies paper both descriptive and an optional objective paper is highly commendable.
The one area of concern, however, in this examination process is the Viva-voce/interview which is the final test for the candidates. Generally this viva-voce screening in considered everywhere an integral part of any selection process necessitated by the need to assess the personality of the candidates and to evaluate the ability of the would-be officer to articulate ‘in the face’ issues pertaining to public domain. To meet this precise objective the interview is usually conducted by a group of experts. In the case of the NPSC it is the Board consisting of a chairman and some members who performs this task.
It is a matter of public concern, however, that in the interviews conducted by the Board in the past one year or so, this Board has been following a pattern which is unethical and potentially discriminatory. For how can a sane person justify the practice of the Board members having access to the Mains marks of the candidates before the interview? What is the need for the Board members to know the mains marks of the viva voce candidates before the viva voce? Is such ‘knowledge’ a necessity to assess the caliber of the candidates or is it to manipulate the viva voce mark allotment? This practice raises a lot of questions. Having access to the Mains marks means that the board members know how much viva voce marks a particular candidate would need to make it into the List(or not to, for that matter) and it can done accordingly(if they want to). The possible implications here are huge; room for discrimination, room for favoritism. Such a working procedure stinks of corruption. The intention behind the adoption of such a procedure is questionable. It compromises the authenticity and credibility of the viva voce and therefore the selection.
Nowhere, not even the highest recruiting agency in the country, the Union Public service Commission (UPSC) Board members have access to the Mains marks of the viva voce candidates of the exams it conducts. This denial of access is done so as to prevent opportunity for human parochialism to play havoc with the recruitment process. Transparency and the need for un-biased judgment therefore demands that the NPSC Board members should not have access to the Mains marks. Its job must be to conduct the interview and allot marks against it. The Mains marks and the total tallying exercise must be highly confidential and remain only within the innermost circle of the Examination Branch with severe penalty (termination) for those who leak or manipulate with it. The viva voce candidates must be judged on the basis of their individual quality and ability and not on the basis of some category (family, region, tribe, social standing, language group etc) to which he or she may belong. Let merit and merit alone be the criterion for selection through NPSC.
Asalie, Wati, Abemo, Kohima
