Authors
Home Education UPSC Failing Aspirants: Systemic Flaws Crush Hopes

UPSC Failing Aspirants: Systemic Flaws Crush Hopes

UPSC Civil Services Examination faces intense scrutiny as systemic flaws crush aspirants’ hopes. Allegations of paper leaks, caste-based discrimination, opaque evaluation, and controversial selection patterns spark outrage.

ByNeeraj Thakur
New Update
UPSC aspirants protesting

UPSC aspirants protesting | Photo courtesy: Special arrangement

Listen to this article
0.75x1x1.5x
00:00/ 00:00
The Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), established under Article 315 of the Indian Constitution, is a cornerstone of India’s governance framework, entrusted with recruiting competent and dedicated civil servants for the All India Services and Central Civil Services. In 2023 alone, over 1.3 million candidates competed for just 1,105 positions. This highlights the UPSC’s critical role in selecting the nation’s administrative elite, including officers for the Indian Administrative Service (IAS), Indian Police Service (IPS), and Indian Foreign Service (IFS).

The UPSC’s merit-based selection process, rooted in transparency and fairness, is designed to uphold the principles of integrity and efficiency, ensuring that only the most capable individuals manage critical sectors like public administration, law enforcement, and foreign affairs. If the UPSC falters—through lapses in impartiality, security, or accountability—the consequences are deep. A compromised recruitment process risks appointing underqualified or unethical officers, leading to inefficiencies, corruption, and eroded public trust in governance. In recent years, however, the UPSC’s reputation has been tarnished by a series of controversies, including allegations of paper leaks, fake certificate fraud, evaluation discrepancies and the likes. Public outcry and media scrutiny have fueled concerns that the UPSC is losing its sheen, casting doubt on its ability to uphold the high standards expected of India’s top recruiting agency.

“I Tried to Commit Suicide”

Advertisment

We Have a Request for You: Keep Our Journalism Alive

We are a small, dedicated team at The Probe, committed to in-depth, slow journalism that dives deeper than daily headlines. We can't sustain our vital work without your support. Please consider contributing to our social impact projects: Support Us or Become a Member of The Probe. Even your smallest support will help us keep our journalism alive.

Shalini (name changed), a determined UPSC aspirant from the Scheduled Caste community, faced a crushing blow when the Civil Services Preliminary results for 2025 were released on June 11. After five arduous attempts at the examination, she had been confident of advancing to the Mains, her optimism evident in the Mains preparation books she had already purchased. “Only those who have walked this path truly understand. After I got the results, I tried to commit suicide. It’s not just me—I know many people who have either tried to harm themselves or are contemplating suicide. It's probably by God's grace that they are still alive, just like me. I ended up harming myself, but I am still alive," she shared, reflecting on the all-consuming nature of the year-long exam cycle, which often leaves aspirants with little time for personal or professional pursuits. The unexpected failure to qualify, despite her meticulous preparation, left her reeling, a sentiment echoed by many candidates navigating the high-stakes process. 

Shalini’s ordeal reflects the deep emotional and financial burdens borne by aspirants, particularly those from marginalised backgrounds, who invest years chasing a civil service dream. Her decision to join protests calling for greater transparency in the evaluation and result declaration processes was born from this setback. 

The weight of repeated failures in the exams, compounded by allegations of systemic flaws, has driven some aspirants to devastating extremes. Asha Uikey, a 25-year-old from Indore, Madhya Pradesh, ended her life in May 2025, leaving behind a 20-page note filled with motivational quotes and a poignant final message: “No one becomes an IAS just like that, wake up from sleep now you have to read.” 

According to police reports, Asha, who lived in a rented accommodation in Hiranagar, had been grappling with the emotional toll of repeated exam failures. Her family, unaware of the depth of her struggles until her phone went unanswered, was set to visit her just days after her death. 

Similarly, in Varanasi, 28-year-old Prem Sharma, who had been preparing for the civil services exams for five years, took his life in 2025 after failing his second attempt. A suicide note found in his room revealed his anguish: “Mother, please forgive me... I couldn’t fulfill your dreams. You educated me and provided all facilities, but I couldn’t qualify in any exam.” 

Police records indicate that Prem, the youngest of five siblings, had become increasingly withdrawn, spending most of his time isolated in his room. These tragedies reveal the crushing pressure aspirants face, not only from the exam’s rigour but also from the personal and familial expectations tied to success. For aspirants like Asha and Prem, the emotional burden is intensified by controversies surrounding the examination process, which cast doubt on the fairness of their efforts. Aspirants invest years, often at great financial and personal cost, only to face uncertainty about whether their papers were evaluated accurately. The emotional toll on the aspirants extends beyond marks, intertwining with a broader loss of trust in an institution meant to embody meritocracy. 

Advertisment
UPSC aspirants protesting in Delhi
UPSC aspirants protesting in Delhi on June 28, 2025 | Photo courtesy: Special arrangment

The Triplet Controversy

Rakshit (name changed), a 27-year-old aspirant from Delhi, faced a bitter reckoning after the 2025 Civil Services Preliminary results were announced on June 11, 2025. Having poured five years into preparing for the exam, this was his fifth attempt as a general category candidate. The grueling process had consumed his early twenties, with countless hours spent in cramped study rooms and coaching centers. 

“I gave everything to this dream,” he said, his voice steady but heavy with resignation. The failure to qualify stung, but what deepened his disillusionment was the emerging “triplet selection pattern” controversy, which cast a shadow over the integrity of the process he had trusted. Now contemplating a private sector job, Rakshit states that aspirants like him feel betrayed not only by their results but by a system they once believed in.

The triplet controversy erupted shortly after the 2025 Prelims results was released, igniting debates across aspirant communities and social media platforms like X. Candidates noticed an unusual trend: in multiple examination centers, three consecutive roll numbers—often corresponding to candidates seated in the same room and row—were selected for the Mains. “This isn’t just about failing,” Rakshit explained. “It’s about wondering if the system is fair. When you see three people in a row from the same center qualify, it makes you question everything.” The pattern, observed across various centers, fueled suspicions of irregularities, with aspirants like Rakshit grappling with the possibility that their papers may not have been evaluated justly. 

Triplet controversy
Candidates noticed an unusual trend: in multiple examination centers, three consecutive roll numbers—often corresponding to candidates seated in the same room and row—were selected for the Mains. | Photo courtesy: Special arrangement

Defenders of the Union Public Service Commission, including some coaching institutes, have offered a counterargument to quell the uproar. They argue that the triplet pattern may be a statistical anomaly rather than evidence of malpractice and that groups of students from the same coaching institutes often apply together, receiving sequential roll numbers and similar seating arrangements. These candidates, rigorously trained and highly motivated, are likely to perform well, potentially explaining the clusters of selections.

Yet, this explanation has done little to assuage aspirants’ concerns, as it fails to address broader allegations of paper leaks and evaluation discrepancies. For candidates like Rakshit, the debate only deepens the uncertainty, leaving them to wonder if their efforts were undermined by factors beyond their control. “It’s not just about marks,” Rakshit said. “It’s the feeling that maybe my paper wasn’t even checked properly.” The lack of transparency in UPSC’s evaluation process, coupled with the commission’s reticence on addressing the triplet allegations has only intensified aspirants’ distress.

Transparency on Trial: Secrecy, Stress, Doubt, and Disillusionment

The Union Public Service Commission has long faced criticism for the opacity of its Civil Services Examination processes, a grievance that intensifies the emotional strain on aspirants already grappling with the exam’s high stakes. Candidates frequently point to the commission’s failure to release answer keys promptly after the Preliminary exam, leaving them unable to evaluate their performance or estimate their likelihood of advancing. Official cut-off marks, crucial for understanding the competitive threshold, are withheld until after the entire examination cycle concludes, often months later. Most strikingly, aspirants receive no individual marks for the Prelims, only a binary pass/fail outcome, depriving them of constructive feedback to refine their approach for future attempts.

The release of the 2025 Prelims results brought these frustrations into sharp focus, as aspirants reported discrepancies that deepened their skepticism. “This year, the results were baffling,” said Sherin, a 26-year-old aspirant from Kerala who attempted the Prelims for the third time. “Many of us who were confident of qualifying for Mains didn’t make it, while others we never expected to pass did. It makes you wonder what’s happening behind closed doors.” 

The Commission’s practice of delaying the release of individual scores, answer keys, and previous year’s cut-offs until after the final interview list is announced—often a year later—intensifies this distress. For aspirants like Sherin, the absence of timely, detailed feedback transforms the exam’s outcome into a black box, amplifying the pain of failure with doubts about the evaluation process’s integrity.

Efforts to bolster transparency, such as the UPSC’s mandate for CCTV surveillance at exam centers, have also fallen short, further eroding trust. The commission introduced CCTV monitoring to curb malpractices like cheating and impersonation. However, aspirants like Shalini and Sherin told The Probe that at several centers during the 2025 Prelims there were no CCTVs. “Some of us noticed there were no CCTV cameras in our exam rooms,” stated Shalini. “And the question papers weren’t even sealed, which is supposed to prevent leaks or tampering.” The sealing process, intended to ensure the integrity of question papers, should have been a standard protocol, yet multiple aspirants claimed that unsealed papers were distributed, a practice they allege has persisted for years.

Alleged Paper Leak Sparks Outrage

On the eve of the Preliminary Examination, a disturbing allegation surfaced in Rajkot, Gujarat, when an Instagram post claimed that the exam’s question paper was being sold for ₹30,000 in PDF format. The post, which gained attention after being reported by a regional newspaper, alleged that the paper was available to only 50 buyers. While no concrete evidence has substantiated these claims, the lack of a swift and transparent response from the UPSC has fueled speculation and distrust. 

A candidate who shared the Instagram post with authorities remarked, “Whether these allegations are true or not, the real issue is the Commission’s silence. No FIR, no police investigation, no public statement—what did they do to address this?” The absence of clarity on whether the commission investigated the claims has left many aspirants questioning the integrity of a process they have devoted years to mastering.

“Credibility at Stake”: Aspirants Demand Exam Overhaul

Himanshi Guleria, a BDS graduate from Indira Gandhi Government Dental College in Jammu and a first-time aspirant from Jammu and Kashmir who sat for the 2025 Civil Services Preliminary Examination has started an online petition against the opaque exam process. “The credibility of this exam is at stake. From paper leaks to unsealed question papers, these issues threaten our futures and demand urgent action.”

Himanshi Guleria
Himanshi Guleria | Photo courtesy: Himanshi

The aspirants’ demands, outlined in Guleria’s petition, pinpoint specific lapses that undermine the integrity of the exams. The absence of carbon copies of OMR sheets prevents candidates from verifying their scores, while the delayed release of answer keys and cut-off marks leaves them in limbo, unable to assess their performance or challenge discrepancies. “When reputable media report such serious allegations like a paper leak, the Commission must respond with a criminal investigation, not silence. How can we trust a process where basic safeguards like sealed papers and CCTV monitoring are ignored?” Guleria asked, echoing sentiments of many aspirants.

Aspirants Allege Caste Bias

Shalini who is from the Scheduled Caste (SC) community, has voiced concerns that echo a broader sentiment among candidates from marginalised backgrounds, pointing to alleged caste-based discrimination in the Civil Services Examination (CSE) interview process. “We’ve noticed that candidates from marginalised communities often receive lower interview scores, regardless of their strong performance in the written exams,” she said. “Regular candidates, even with average written scores, tend to secure higher interview marks, while for us, no matter how well we perform, our interview scores often pull us down.” 

This disparity, coupled with the subjective nature of the interview, raises questions about whether social capital—appearance, English fluency, or cultural markers—disproportionately influences outcomes for marginalised candidates.

The UPSC’s requirement to disclose sub-caste details in the Detailed Application Form (DAF) has further fueled these concerns. Shalini highlighted, “This is the only exam that asks us to specify our sub-caste, like ‘Chamaar,’ alongside our SC category. Why is this necessary?” Aspirants allege that revealing caste details to interview panels risks bias, proposing that caste information be concealed during interviews. The UPSC has not publicly responded to these suggestions, and no official data confirms whether interview boards directly access sub-caste details. Yet, the persistence of this practice continues to stoke fears that it enables discriminatory profiling, particularly when combined with the lack of transparency in interview scoring.

Petitions Mount as Trust Erodes

The Union Public Service Commission’s practice of discarding questions from the Civil Services Preliminary Examination after the test has sparked massive discontent among aspirants, who argue it undermines fairness. Dropping questions without clear justification can drastically alter candidates’ scores and their chances of qualifying for the Mains. “When a question you answered correctly is discarded, it feels like your effort is erased,” said Harsh Kumar, a first-time aspirant. The UPSC has dropped questions in past exams citing reasons like ambiguity, but the lack of detailed explanations or expert review fuels perceptions of arbitrariness. For candidates, who rely on every mark to bridge the gap to the next stage, this practice can nullify a year’s preparation, deepening the emotional toll of an already grueling process. 

UPSC aspirants protesting
UPSC aspirants protesting | Photo courtesy: Special arrangement

Frustrated by these and other grievances, the aspirants have escalated their demands by submitting a formal petition to the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), the administrative body overseeing the UPSC. The petition requests immediate intervention and a judicial inquiry into the 2025 Prelims. Aspirants are calling for the prompt release of answer keys and cut-off marks post-Prelims, a practice they argue is standard in other competitive exams like those conducted by state Public Service Commissions. They also demand a probe into allegations of paper leaks, unsealed question papers, and the controversial triplet selection pattern. 

Beyond procedural lapses, aspirants have raised concerns about the Civil Services Aptitude Test (CSAT), a qualifying paper in the Prelims, which they claim has become disproportionately difficult. Designed to test basic aptitude at a Class 10 level, the CSAT’s increasing quantitative complexity—evident in the 2025 exam disadvantages candidates from non-technical and underprivileged backgrounds. The petition to the DoPT demands standardisation of the CSAT to align with its original intent, ensuring equitable evaluation. Additionally, aspirants seek the provision of carbon copies of OMR sheets, a practice common in state-level exams, to enable independent score verification. 

The Probe has sent a detailed questionnaire to Dr. Ajay Kumar, Chairman of the Union Public Service Commission, seeking the UPSC’s official stance on the concerns of the aspirants. This story will be updated as soon as we receive a response from the Commission.

Author
Neeraj Thakur
Tags: dow-jones UPSC Civil Services Exam
You May Also like