THRC halts appointments os Medical Officers selected with 14/100 as the Tripura Public Service Commission faces backlash after reports reveal some newly selected Medical Officers scored as low as 14 out of 100. The Commission has issued notices, sought reports from TPSC and Health Services, and halted appointments of low-scoring candidates, citing threats to public health and constitutional rights.
The Tripura Human Rights Commission (THRC) has directed the state government to put on hold the appointment of candidates who scored 30 marks or less out of 100 in the recent General Duty Medical Officer (GDMO) recruitment examination conducted by the Tripura Public Service Commission (TPSC). The appointments will remain suspended until further orders.
The Commission, headed by Justice (Retd.) Arindam Lodh, took suo motu cognizance of the matter on Thursday after several media reports flagged the alarmingly low qualifying scores of some recommended candidates. Justice Lodh, clearly concerned about the implications for public health, observed that the state’s obligation to provide quality medical care cannot be compromised by what appears to be a dramatic lowering of recruitment standards.
“This is a serious matter of public interest,” the Commission noted. “The appointment of doctors with such poor scores could directly jeopardise the lives and well-being of the people of Tripura. We are duty-bound to ensure that public health is not sacrificed at the altar of expediency or flawed recruitment policy.”
Accountability Sought from TPSC and Health Department
In its directive, the THRC has sought detailed reports from both the Director of Health Services and the Secretary of TPSC, demanding explanations for the criteria used in recommending such candidates. The Commission has given them 10 days from the receipt of the order to respond.
Justice Lodh emphasised that while the state’s healthcare system is under pressure due to manpower shortages, “lowering the bar to such an extent that barely qualified candidates are entrusted with public health duties amounts to a violation of people’s right to life and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution.”
Wider Public Outcry
The revelations have sparked outrage among sections of the civil society. Public health experts argue that a doctor who cannot demonstrate basic competency in a qualifying exam may struggle to provide safe and effective treatment, especially in rural and remote areas where oversight is minimal.
Opposition leaders have also weighed in, accusing the government of prioritising political or quota considerations over merit. “It’s a betrayal of public trust,” said one senior opposition legislator. “We are talking about the lives of our people. Appointing doctors with such dismal scores is not just negligence—it’s a potential disaster in the making.”
The Stakes for Tripura’s Health Services
Tripura has long struggled with doctor-patient ratios well below the national average, particularly in its tribal and hilly regions. The state government has, in the past, justified relaxed recruitment criteria as a way to address chronic vacancies. However, critics warn that the trade-off between quantity and quality has already led to cases of medical negligence and preventable fatalities.
With the THRC stepping in, the issue has now taken a legal and constitutional turn. If the Commission finds that the recruitment process violated the principles of fairness, transparency, and competence, it could recommend a complete review—or even annulment—of the current selection list.
The Tripura Public Service Commission (TPSC) has come under sharp scrutiny after reports emerged that several newly selected General Duty Medical Officers (GDMOs) in the state secured alarmingly low marks in their recruitment examination—some scoring as little as 14 out of 100. The revelation has sparked widespread concern about the potential compromise in the quality of healthcare services in the state.
According to the news reports, a total of 216 Medical Officers were recommended by TPSC for the post of General Duty Medical Officer under the Health & Family Welfare Department of the Government of Tripura. These recommendations, made in July 2024, were supposed to pave the way for their official appointments. However, the published results reveal that a significant number of selected candidates had scored below 30 marks out of 100 in their recruitment tests—raising serious questions about the merit and eligibility of these candidates.
Concerns Over Public Health and Constitutional Rights
The issue has drawn the attention of a state-level Commission, which has expressed deep concern about the potential consequences for public health.
The Commission pointed out that the right to appropriate healthcare is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It stressed that appointing medical officers who have demonstrated poor performance in their qualifying examinations could directly endanger the lives of citizens and undermine the state’s obligation to provide quality healthcare.
“If the Tripura Public Service Commission recommends the names of candidates who secured less than 30 out of 100, it means the Commission is playing with the lives of the citizens of the state,” the Commission observed in its official statement.
Notices Issued to TPSC and Health Directorate
In response to the reports, the Commission has issued formal notices to the Director of Health Services, Government of Tripura, and the Secretary of TPSC. Both have been directed to submit detailed reports on the recruitment process and the selection criteria within 10 days of receiving the notice. Copies of the media reports have also been forwarded to the concerned departments for reference.
The Commission made it clear that the matter is of larger public interest and therefore warrants urgent and transparent investigation.
Appointment of Low-Scoring Officers Put on Hold
Significantly, the Commission has recommended that the appointment of all medical officers who scored 30 marks or less be kept in abeyance until further orders. This decision comes amid growing public concern that allowing such candidates to serve could jeopardize patient safety and erode trust in the healthcare system.
The Commission has fixed August 26, 2025, as the date for further hearing of the matter, by which time the reports from both the Director of Health Services and the Secretary of TPSC are expected to be submitted.
Public Reaction and Broader Implications
The revelations have triggered a wave of criticism across social and political circles in Tripura. Many citizens have expressed shock that candidates with such low marks could be entrusted with public health responsibilities. Opposition parties and civil society groups are likely to seize upon the issue, calling for greater transparency and accountability in state-level recruitment processes.
Experts warn that this controversy could have long-term implications for Tripura’s healthcare infrastructure. “Doctors are entrusted with the lives of patients. If recruitment processes are compromised, the state risks damaging public confidence and worsening already strained medical services,” said a senior healthcare policy analyst.
Next Steps
With the Commission taking cognizance of the matter and halting questionable appointments, the spotlight is now firmly on the TPSC and the Health & Family Welfare Department. Their forthcoming reports will be crucial in determining whether the selection process was flawed or if there are other explanations for the low marks among certain qualified candidates.
| Also Read: Tripura outrage: Medical Officers selected with just 14 marks out of 100 |
Until then, the debate over meritocracy, fairness, and the state’s duty to protect public health is expected to dominate Tripura’s political and social discourse in the coming days.
