Recurrent paper leaks have eroded faith in public recruitment. Critically examine the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 and the need for a cooperative Centre–State framework.

Faith in public recruitment depends on candidates believing the exam is fair. In October 2026, MPSC aspirants in Pune protested over leaked papers and asked for accountability and fixed exam dates [5]. The 2024 Act was India's first central law against exam fraud. It is a strong deterrent, but its reach is limited.

Strengths of the Act

• Broad definition: "unfair means" includes leaking papers or answer keys, tampering with computer systems and merit-list documents, and running fake exams [1].
• Deterrence: general offences carry 3–5 years in jail and fines up to ₹10 lakh. Organised crime carries 5–10 years and a fine of at least ₹1 crore. All offences are cognisable and non-bailable [1].
• Institutional liability: the proportionate cost of the exam is recovered from a guilty service provider [1].
• Investigation: cases go to an officer of at least DSP rank, and the Centre can transfer them to central agencies [1].

Limitations

• Narrow scope: it covers only UPSC, SSC, RRBs, IBPS, NTA and central departments [1]. State PSC exams fall outside it.
• Uneven State laws: each State relies on its own law, such as UP's Act 8 of 2024 and Karnataka's Act 45 of 2024 [2][3]. Many States have none.
• Punishes but does not prevent: leaks happen during printing, transport and storage. The Radhakrishnan Committee flagged the NTA's reliance on contract staff [4].
• No remedy for honest candidates: the Act sets no compensation, fee refund or deadline for a re-exam [1].

Need for a Cooperative Centre–State Framework

• Model State law that matches central definitions and penalties, adopted through consultation, since States legislate for State PSCs.
• Shared security standards: extend the Radhakrishnan proposals to State PSCs: digital transmission of papers, secure test centres in every district and Aadhaar-based biometric checks [4].
• Joint enforcement: State police and central agencies share intelligence against leak gangs that operate across States.
• Binding exam calendars and fixed deadlines for re-exams, which answer the protesters' main demand [5].

Centre: model law + security standards + central agencies
            ↕  (cooperative federalism)
States: their own Acts + PSC audits + district security cells
            ↓
   Leak-proof, time-bound recruitment

Fig: Centre–State framework for exam integrity

The 2024 Act makes punishment certain, but trust also needs prevention, a uniform approach across States and redress for candidates. A cooperative framework that combines central standards with State action would secure equality of opportunity in public employment (Article 16) for every aspirant.