gswith
Login
No Answers

What are the checks and balances in the appointment process of key public service commission officials?

Given the Supreme Court's decision on the Bihar Public Service Commission chairperson appointment, I am curious about the mechanisms that ensure transparency and fairness in such appointments and why controversies arise.
appointments
judiciary
transparency
The appointment of key officials in Public Service Commissions (PSCs), such as the chairperson and members, is crucial for ensuring the integrity and efficiency of recruitment to public services. The Constitution and various judicial pronouncements have laid down checks and balances to promote transparency and fairness in these appointments.
  • Constitutional Provisions:
    • Article 316 of the Indian Constitution specifies that the Chairperson and members of State PSCs are appointed by the Governor, while those of the UPSC are appointed by the President.
    • The qualifications and tenure are also outlined, ensuring a degree of uniformity and security of tenure.
  • Consultation Process:
    • Though the Governor/President makes appointments, there is usually a consultation process with the Council of Ministers, and sometimes with the Chief Justice or other senior officials, to ensure the candidate's suitability.
  • Security of Tenure and Removal:
    • PSC members enjoy security of tenure; they cannot be removed except on the grounds and process mentioned in Article 317, which involves an inquiry by the Supreme Court, thus protecting them from arbitrary removal.
  • Judicial Review:
    • The judiciary can review the appointment process if there are allegations of arbitrariness, lack of transparency, or violation of constitutional provisions, as seen in recent Supreme Court judgments.
  • Transparency and Merit:
    • Best practices recommend clear criteria for selection, involvement of search/selection committees, and public disclosure of qualifications, though this is not always strictly followed, leading to controversies.
  • Why Controversies Arise:
    • Lack of transparency, political interference, and appointment of under-qualified or politically connected individuals often lead to disputes and judicial intervention.
    • Absence of a uniform, codified procedure for all states can result in inconsistencies and allegations of favoritism.
Answered a month ago
Rahul Aspirants