The PSC is not party service commission
text_fields
“Sixty per cent of all Public Service Commission (PSC) appointments in India take place in our state of Kerala. In 2025 alone, the government made 36,813 appointments through the PSC, enabling it to provide government jobs to more than 30,000 people for the third consecutive year. From May 2016 to October 31, 2025, a total of 300,773 appointments were made through the PSC—this is history. Around 30,000 new posts were created in the state, ensuring more employment opportunities... A new era is dawning in Kerala, where the younger generation can dream of securing a government job and turn that dream into reality.” This was one of the self-laudatory advertisements released as part of the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government's campaign groundwork for the election that sought to secure a third consecutive term in office. However, after the LDF lost the election and the United Democratic Front (UDF) assumed power, the mounting complaints confronting the government about the PSC (Public Service Commission)—the very institution that was said to have ushered in a “new era”—suggest that what actually emerged over the past ten years was a very different era: that the PSC, once the dream institution for Kerala’s job aspirants, had been transformed into a commission that serves only party loyalists.
The precise answer to the question of who truly benefited during the LDF’s two consecutive terms in office leads directly to the ruling party’s nepotism and the rehabilitation of its loyalists. The Kerala PSC, a premier constitutional institution that is expected to uphold the highest standards of credibility, transparency, and impartiality, now finds every aspect of its functioning—from the conduct of examinations and the preparation of rank lists to its recruitment process—mired in allegations and criticism. The PSC has initiated an internal inquiry into these complaints. However, neither the UDF government nor the Chief Minister himself may be able to place complete confidence in the effectiveness of an internal investigation conducted by a Commission that was appointed during the previous government's tenure and is accused of having committed these excesses by yielding to the interests and dictates of the then ruling front. Therefore, given the seriousness of the allegations, it is only reasonable to expect that the government will order a comprehensive and foolproof investigation.
The Chairperson of the PSC is responsible for constituting the panel that prepares question papers. Under the former Chairperson, who was a leader of a Left-affiliated service organisation, those appointed to the panel were almost exclusively leaders or members of that very association. The same individuals also served as subject experts for interviews. By rule, the members of the Commission are not supposed to know which of the questions prepared by the panel have ultimately been selected. However, it is now alleged that, because many panelists have withdrawn citing inadequate remuneration, a set of questions by a single person is often accepted without modification. In such a situation, there is hardly any need to look for other loopholes through which question papers might leak. In a recruitment examination conducted for the Fisheries Department some time ago, the question paper was prepared, and the interviews were conducted by teachers from a lone university. They allegedly provided examination coaching and mock interviews to their own candidates, effectively grooming them for selection. When the final rank list was published, more than thirty-five candidates had graduated from the same university and belonged to the same political party. Finding this highly unusual, the Director of Fisheries himself requested the government to order an investigation. Nothing came of it. Instead, the senior official who had withheld the probation of those appointed under these allegedly questionable circumstances was transferred.
The PSC also engages personnel already working in other positions within the Commission on a temporary basis under what is known as the "PRISM" (Promotional Regional Information & Service Management) panel. When members of this category of workers—whose engagement the PSC itself treats as casual employment—applied for the post of Assistant Information Officer by claiming this experience, their applications were initially rejected. However, the party intervened, arguing that they were its own supporters who had been recruited for the government's publicity programmes and would otherwise be left without a livelihood. Consequently, at unusual speed, revised experience certificates were submitted to the PSC office, enabling them to secure places in the rank list. It should be remembered that this was done by the very PSC which ordinarily imposes a lifetime ban on candidates who submit corrected or altered certificates. In another instance, an accused in the stabbing case at University College secured the first rank in a PSC examination. During a raid on the accused's residence, investigators recovered a bundle of blank answer sheets belonging to the University of Kerala.
Against the backdrop of such experiences, serious allegations also arose regarding the Kerala Administrative Service (KAS) examination conducted in 2020. The complaint concerned the preliminary OMR-based examination, which was taken by around 450,000 candidates. It was alleged that 12,000 answer sheets, which the machine reportedly failed to read, were instead evaluated manually by 21 PSC officials.
The PSC Chairperson has finally agreed to implement the Commission's decision to have its Internal Vigilance wing investigate the alleged examination irregularities. However, this alone will not address the broader allegation that, by leaving vacancies unfilled while rank lists remained valid, and by making temporary appointments through the back door of relatives of PSC officials and those with links to the Left parties, the LDF used the strength of its continued rule to turn the PSC into a party service commission. The PSC's present course—one that has allegedly crushed the hopes of tens of thousands of candidates - who sacrifice their time, livelihood, and years of their lives, studying relentlessly without rest to succeed in these examinations - must be brought under control. It is imperative that the Commission must restore its credibility and regain the public's trust.