•-The ongoing NPSC (Mains) Examination, 2010 is creating an air of confusion and disappointment amongst the candidates. At the outset, there seems to be a lack of co-ordination between the staff agency and the line agency. Firstly, the editorial job is extremely shoddy, to say the least. There are innumerable spelling errors in every paper, especially in the Optionals. Even proper names are not spared. The Commission, being the only elite recruiting agency in the state should maintain a certain parameter of standard if it wishes to command respect from the masses. Secondly, vast disparity between the syllabi prescribed and the questions asked has been detected in the already appeared papers. Point in case is Public Administration. A considerable number of questions were asked on topics like Research Methodology and International Organizations which do not fall within the purview of the prescribed syllabus. Even in English Literature undue weightage was given to Unit 1 at the expense of the remaining six units which, most importantly, covered the prescribed texts. The pattern is unfair since English Literature is especially text-specific unlike the other subjects which are topic-specific. It would have been more just and more logical if the question setters had strictly adhered to the topics (and texts) specified in the syllabi. After all, this examination is targeted for graduate level candidates, not PhD. Scholars.
The NPSC have, in the past, been quite receptive to constructive criticisms in the form of public opinions. We do not expect it to be flawless, but being a governmental body responsible to the public, it ought to strive to be as flawless as possible. It remains to be seen how far or how much the Commission is willing to extend its means so as to rectify the current issues. In the meantime, the candidates could only wait in hope that concrete solutions and machinery would be put in place to administer justice to its hopeful candidates.
Zanbeni H.
NPSC (Mains) candidate
