Taking a closer look at MPSC’s repeated failures down the years
|
Thounaojam Luwangamba
The Manipur High Court has in the past demonstrated commendable judicial courage, particularly when it struck down the 2016 MPSC examination for serious irregularities, a decision later upheld by the Supreme Court. However, in recent years, concerns have grown about the slow pace of proceedings in ongoing recruit- ment-related litigations. The 43 SDC recruitment case, which questioned appointments made beyond notified vacancies through a Cabinet decision rather than by MPSC, has been in the judgment-on-maintaina-bility phase since it was first listed before a single Judge in April 2023. Similarly, the writ petition seeking disclosure of MPSC mains answer sheets, following an order by the Manipur Information Commission directing MPSC to release them under the RTI Act, has been pending since June 2023 and is still at the hearing stage. These are not isolated delays but signs of a broader pattern where time itself has become the greatest ally of official wrongdoing.
For nearly a decade, Manipur’s civil-service aspirants have lived through a recurring nightmare. The MPSC 2016 examination was quashed by the High Court for grave irregularities, and the Supreme Court in November 2019 upheld that verdict, directing a re-conduct of the mains within four months. Then came the 43 SDC appointments made beyond notified vacancies, raising new questions of legality and fairness. Most recently, the MPSC 2025 mains question paper fiasco exposed another level of administrative chaos.
Three controversies, one unmistakable pattern: every time MPSC errs, the matter reaches the Court, remains entangled for years, and by the time judgment arrives, a new irregularity has already appeared. This cycle has hardened into a habit, not because the law is weak, but because justice has been painfully slow.
The Court’s Silence and the Commission’s Confidence
The Manipur High Court has, in past judgments, shown courage to strike down flawed examinations. But courage delayed is courage diluted. The 2016 case took nearly six years to conclude. By then, thousands of aspirants had aged out or abandoned hope. The cost of justice, both in time and money, was borne entirely by the young and powerless.
That slow pace has not gone unnoticed by MPSC. When accountability is postponed, irresponsibility becomes policy. The Commission has gradually learned that procedural delays serve as a cushion, as petitions often take years to conclude, interim stays provide temporary relief, and by the time a final order arrives, new examinations are already underway. In this way, judicial delay has quietly taken the place of judicial oversight. Each adjournment and pending writ sends a signal that Constitutional scrutiny can be outlasted. This growing perception that the Court’s process moves more slowly than the Commission’s next mistake has emboldened MPSC to act without fear of consequence. What should have been a rare institutional lapse has turned into a recurring pattern of administrative failure.
Justice Delayed Is Not Just Denied, It Is Dangerous
The phrase “justice delayed is justice denied” sounds familiar, but in recruitment disputes, it cuts deeper. Each delayed judgment means lost years, lost eligibility, and broken livelihoods. Yet beyond individual suffering lies a greater danger: delay corrodes deterrence.
When the Judiciary fails to act swiftly against institutional malpractice, it inadvertently normalises it. A quashed exam after six years becomes post-mortem paperwork. For aspirants, the message is clear: even if you win, you lose everything along the way. For MPSC, the message is even clearer that it can afford to wait out the Courts. That is why, after the 2016 fiasco, instead of reform, the Commission went ahead with 43 appointments beyond the advertised vacancies. Today, after the 2025 paper-mix-up, public outrage feels muted, not because people have forgiven MPSC, but because they no longer believe the Courts can deliver timely justice.
The Human Cost of Judicial Inertia
Behind these legal files stand real people. Many aspirants who fought the 2016 case spent their savings on lawyers and travel, only to see their youth fade in waiting rooms. Those now affected by the 2025 fiasco already know the script. A petition will be filed, a stay may follow, and the case will probably be listed and relisted for years. Few have the strength or resources to endure that cycle again.
This slow pace also undermines public faith in the Judiciary itself. The High Court is the final refuge for those failed by administrative bodies. When that refuge becomes synonymous with delay, cynicism replaces trust. The tragedy is not only administrative; it is Constitutional.
The Judiciary’s Constitutional Duty
The framers of the Constitution gave the High Courts extraordinary independence not for prestige, but for protection of fairness. In public recruitment, that independence carries a moral duty to safeguard opportunity and justice. Manipur’s youth deserve a Judiciary that understands that time is justice.
It is not enough for the Court to eventually quash irregular examinations. What is needed is timely adjudication that prevents such irregularities from recurring. Recruitment-related petitions must be treated as time-bound, human-impact cases, not as routine civil suits. The High Court can and must set the standard by
1. Creating fast-track benches for recruitment disputes,
2. Fixing strict disposal timelines for petitions affecting large groups of aspirants,
3. Continuously monitoring compliance with previous orders, and
4. Publishing data on long-pending recruitment cases to restore transparency.
Such reforms will send a clear message that delay can no longer protect inefficiency and that the law must move as swiftly as the injustice it seeks to correct.
Why This Moment Matters
Manipur’s youth have shown remarkable resilience. Despite repeated setbacks, they continue to prepare, hoping that fairness will eventually prevail. But institutions cannot demand infinite patience. The 2016 judgment was supposed to cleanse the system; instead, MPSC repeated its mistakes. The 43 SDC episode ignored clear legal principles. And now, with the 2025 paper error, the Commission again appears confident that TIME, not accountability, will save it.
That confidence exists because justice has been slow. And in a system of repeated administrative failure, slow justice becomes complicity by omission. The High Court must recognise that every pending MPSC case is more than just a file; it is a test of the Judiciary’s moral authority.
The High Court Must Awaken Its Own Timelines
The problem today is not a lack of law, but a lack of urgency. MPSC continues to falter, not in defiance of the law, but in reliance on its delays. When justice sleeps, misgovernance thrives. To restore public trust, the High Court of Manipur must treat the backlog of MPSC cases as a Constitutional emergency in which the delay itself has become the violation. Swift, time-bound justice can still rebuild accountability and faith.
For a generation of Manipuri youth who have lost years to negligence and silence, the message must finally change: justice will not only be done, it will be done in time.
The writer is Founder, MAHEI Civil Services Institute
The Manipur High Court has in the past demonstrated commendable judicial courage, particularly when it struck down the 2016 MPSC examination for serious irregularities, a decision later upheld by the Supreme Court. However, in recent years, concerns have grown about the slow pace of proceedings in ongoing recruit- ment-related litigations. The 43 SDC recruitment case, which questioned appointments made beyond notified vacancies through a Cabinet decision rather than by MPSC, has been in the judgment-on-maintaina-bility phase since it was first listed before a single Judge in April 2023. Similarly, the writ petition seeking disclosure of MPSC mains answer sheets, following an order by the Manipur Information Commission directing MPSC to release them under the RTI Act, has been pending since June 2023 and is still at the hearing stage. These are not isolated delays but signs of a broader pattern where time itself has become the greatest ally of official wrongdoing.
For nearly a decade, Manipur’s civil-service aspirants have lived through a recurring nightmare. The MPSC 2016 examination was quashed by the High Court for grave irregularities, and the Supreme Court in November 2019 upheld that verdict, directing a re-conduct of the mains within four months. Then came the 43 SDC appointments made beyond notified vacancies, raising new questions of legality and fairness. Most recently, the MPSC 2025 mains question paper fiasco exposed another level of administrative chaos.
Three controversies, one unmistakable pattern: every time MPSC errs, the matter reaches the Court, remains entangled for years, and by the time judgment arrives, a new irregularity has already appeared. This cycle has hardened into a habit, not because the law is weak, but because justice has been painfully slow.
The Court’s Silence and the Commission’s Confidence
The Manipur High Court has, in past judgments, shown courage to strike down flawed examinations. But courage delayed is courage diluted. The 2016 case took nearly six years to conclude. By then, thousands of aspirants had aged out or abandoned hope. The cost of justice, both in time and money, was borne entirely by the young and powerless.
That slow pace has not gone unnoticed by MPSC. When accountability is postponed, irresponsibility becomes policy. The Commission has gradually learned that procedural delays serve as a cushion, as petitions often take years to conclude, interim stays provide temporary relief, and by the time a final order arrives, new examinations are already underway. In this way, judicial delay has quietly taken the place of judicial oversight. Each adjournment and pending writ sends a signal that Constitutional scrutiny can be outlasted. This growing perception that the Court’s process moves more slowly than the Commission’s next mistake has emboldened MPSC to act without fear of consequence. What should have been a rare institutional lapse has turned into a recurring pattern of administrative failure.
Justice Delayed Is Not Just Denied, It Is Dangerous
The phrase “justice delayed is justice denied” sounds familiar, but in recruitment disputes, it cuts deeper. Each delayed judgment means lost years, lost eligibility, and broken livelihoods. Yet beyond individual suffering lies a greater danger: delay corrodes deterrence.
When the Judiciary fails to act swiftly against institutional malpractice, it inadvertently normalises it. A quashed exam after six years becomes post-mortem paperwork. For aspirants, the message is clear: even if you win, you lose everything along the way. For MPSC, the message is even clearer that it can afford to wait out the Courts. That is why, after the 2016 fiasco, instead of reform, the Commission went ahead with 43 appointments beyond the advertised vacancies. Today, after the 2025 paper-mix-up, public outrage feels muted, not because people have forgiven MPSC, but because they no longer believe the Courts can deliver timely justice.
The Human Cost of Judicial Inertia
Behind these legal files stand real people. Many aspirants who fought the 2016 case spent their savings on lawyers and travel, only to see their youth fade in waiting rooms. Those now affected by the 2025 fiasco already know the script. A petition will be filed, a stay may follow, and the case will probably be listed and relisted for years. Few have the strength or resources to endure that cycle again.
This slow pace also undermines public faith in the Judiciary itself. The High Court is the final refuge for those failed by administrative bodies. When that refuge becomes synonymous with delay, cynicism replaces trust. The tragedy is not only administrative; it is Constitutional.
The Judiciary’s Constitutional Duty
The framers of the Constitution gave the High Courts extraordinary independence not for prestige, but for protection of fairness. In public recruitment, that independence carries a moral duty to safeguard opportunity and justice. Manipur’s youth deserve a Judiciary that understands that time is justice.
It is not enough for the Court to eventually quash irregular examinations. What is needed is timely adjudication that prevents such irregularities from recurring. Recruitment-related petitions must be treated as time-bound, human-impact cases, not as routine civil suits. The High Court can and must set the standard by
1. Creating fast-track benches for recruitment disputes,
2. Fixing strict disposal timelines for petitions affecting large groups of aspirants,
3. Continuously monitoring compliance with previous orders, and
4. Publishing data on long-pending recruitment cases to restore transparency.
Such reforms will send a clear message that delay can no longer protect inefficiency and that the law must move as swiftly as the injustice it seeks to correct.
Why This Moment Matters
Manipur’s youth have shown remarkable resilience. Despite repeated setbacks, they continue to prepare, hoping that fairness will eventually prevail. But institutions cannot demand infinite patience. The 2016 judgment was supposed to cleanse the system; instead, MPSC repeated its mistakes. The 43 SDC episode ignored clear legal principles. And now, with the 2025 paper error, the Commission again appears confident that TIME, not accountability, will save it.
That confidence exists because justice has been slow. And in a system of repeated administrative failure, slow justice becomes complicity by omission. The High Court must recognise that every pending MPSC case is more than just a file; it is a test of the Judiciary’s moral authority.
The High Court Must Awaken Its Own Timelines
The problem today is not a lack of law, but a lack of urgency. MPSC continues to falter, not in defiance of the law, but in reliance on its delays. When justice sleeps, misgovernance thrives. To restore public trust, the High Court of Manipur must treat the backlog of MPSC cases as a Constitutional emergency in which the delay itself has become the violation. Swift, time-bound justice can still rebuild accountability and faith.
For a generation of Manipuri youth who have lost years to negligence and silence, the message must finally change: justice will not only be done, it will be done in time.
The writer is Founder, MAHEI Civil Services Institute