What's New

Case Studies

Q. You, the chairperson of a State Public Service Commission (SPSC), come to know that there were instances of rampant cheating in a competitive exam conducted recently by the SPSC. Your daughter, who also appeared in this exam and is confident of clearing it corroborates the same. However, she denies engaging in any such activity herself. Whatever decision the Commission takes is bound to affect the career of a large number of candidates who appeared in the exam, including your own daughter. (a) Identify the different stakeholders and their interests in the case above. (b) Enumerate the options you have to handle the current situation. What will be your choice and why? (c) Suggest measures that you would take to make sure that a similar situation does not arise in future.

(a) This given situation is of an administrative crisis for the State Public Service Commission, while for the Chairperson, it demands ethical conduct in professional duty and personal life. Tackling corrupt practices, salvaging the image of the SPSC and restoring faith of students in the Commission should be the highest priority for him. Making the examination process corruption free augurs well for the future prospects of all the students including his daughter. The different stakeholders and their interest include:

• The SPSC, represented through its Chairperson- To ensure that any unfair practice brought to

public notice is duly enquired upon and action taken quickly to restore faith of students and people in fairness of the process.

• Student community who are directly affected due to corrupt practices.
• Administrative machinery of the State, responsible to oversee examination and conduct it in correct manner. Their credibility is under question because of their failure to act earlier.
• General Public and their trust deficit in a Constitutional body that selects officers to govern the

State.

• Student community who are directly affected due to corrupt practices. This includes the daughter of the Chairman as well.

(b) Options available are as follows:

Option 1: Ignore the complains of cheating

Merits

• Cheating is an unavoidable but minimizable aspect of any exam. Since strict vigil at all places

cannot be maintained even during re-exam, there is no point cancelling the current one.

• It will maintain status-quo within the organisation.
• It may be expected that only a few of those of cheat will get through, largely the lot will be hardworking and honest.

Demerits

• Cheating makes a mockery of the competition which is being used to assess the capabilities of future leaders and decision makers.
• It will rob the opportunity from hundreds of deserving candidates.
• Non- deserving and morally corrupt candidates will become officers, who in return will rot the

administrative system.

Option 2: Set an internal enquiry, but let recent exam process to get over

Merits

• Internal enquiry will help authenticate the news of cheating in the exam.
• It will help curb such practices in the future.
• Relief for students who have cleared this year.

Demerits

• Enquiry is time taking process. And if the the incidents of cheating were real, it means recruitment of non-meritorious candidates.
• Internal enquiry might be sabotaged since there are chances that someone from the Commission might be involved.

Option 3: Temporarily suspend the examination process and demand an external investigation.

Merits

• It will make sure that those who used unfair means are not selected.
• Will send the message to the public that the Chairperson is incorruptible and puts public interest ahead of his personal interest.
• Will restore the faith of general public and candidates in the Commission.
• Will prevent any internal interference in investigation process.

Demerits

• The ability to conduct fair exam and to investigate cases of irregularities by the State Commission will be questioned by certain sections.
• Stalling will keep the deserving candidates in uncertainity.
• Before cancelling the examination process, it is important to ascertain the veracity of cheating allegations.
• It may also hamper the selection of Chairperson’s daughter.

Preferred course of action

The issue is the institutional integrity of the SPSC and the preferred course should be ‘no compromise’ as the public trust, transparency and integrity of the process of recruitment of civil service is a major plank of a democratic modern state.

• First step should be reasonably ascertain whether rampant cheating has taken place or not. This can be done even without an enquiry so that quick corrective actions be taken.
• If the cheating was confined to a few centres then re-conducting exams at these centres may be considered.
• If it was widespread throughout the state then cancellation of exam is the preferred option.
• Besides setting up internal enquiry within the commission, the Chairperson should request the State government for an external investigation preferably from CBI. Those involved in these irregularities and their accomplices should be strictly dealt with. This will send a strong message

about the seriousness of the issue and will deter incidences of similar nature in future.

(c) It is important to bring in transparency, remove apprehensions of favoritism and curb malpractice in recruitment process of Public Service Commission. To achieve the same, following measures can be taken:

• Transparency and proactiveness: Timely sharing of exam scores with candidates, asking for feedback on question paper etc.
• One-time Registration (OTR): OTR to be linked to Government ID’s like Aadhar. Aadhar linked

Biometric details of the candidates can be verified at the time of examination to avoid impersonation. It can also tackle any future controversies that might arise after the recruitment is done. This could be a costly and cumbersome affair but will bring transparency in the process.

• Use of CCTVs: Cameras should be installed at exam centers and video footage can be collected for evidence in case of any incident of malpractice coming to light.
• Security Arrangements: Use of State Police as well as Central Forces to frisk the candidates for electronic gadgets. Use of Central Forces is important as local police can be influenced.
• Squads: Squads comprising of security forces and members of SPSC should conduct surprise

checks at the centers.

• Strict Punitive Action: All the erring candidates should be banned for life. Also, strict punishments should be handed to all those involved in the cheating scam, including those in the

Commission.

• Proper scrutiny: Antecedents of private players engaged at any stage of the examination should be properly verified and adequate safeguards must be taken.
• Sensitisation of invigilators towards the gravity of the task.