The recent declaration of the UPSC Civil Services Examination (CSE) 2025 results on March 6, 2026, has once again highlighted a persistent challenge for Meghalaya: zero selections from the state in the final merit list. With 958 candidates recommended nationwide for prestigious services such as IAS, IPS, and IFS, Meghalaya drew a complete blank for yet another year. This marks over a decade—more than 12–14 years, depending on the benchmark—since the last notable successes from the state’s indigenous communities, particularly the Khasi-Jaintia hills, with Isawanda Laloo and Daribha Lyndem clearing the exam in 2012. While some candidates from the state have occasionally qualified for allied services or reached the Mains stage in intervening years, none have secured a spot in the core civil services final list in recent cycles.
This repeated outcome stands in stark contrast to neighboring states in the Northeast. In the 2025 cycle, Manipur produced six successful candidates despite ongoing challenges, Assam had three, and Sikkim one. States like Nagaland, Mizoram, and Tripura also recorded zero selections in this round, but Meghalaya’s prolonged drought has sparked widespread introspection among educators, journalists, former bureaucrats, and the public.
Several interconnected factors contribute to this trend, as discussed in local media, opinion pieces by prominent voices like journalist Patricia Mukhim, and statements from state officials.
First, the sheer low volume of serious aspirants plays a major role. Compared to larger states or even some Northeast peers, very few candidates from Meghalaya register for and consistently prepare for the UPSC CSE. The exam demands a massive applicant pool to yield even a handful of successes, given its extreme selectivity (national pass rates hover around 0.1–0.2%). Without sufficient numbers attempting seriously, the odds remain statistically daunting.
Second, there is a perceived lack of sustained motivation for such high-stakes, long-duration national competitions. Many young people in Meghalaya gravitate toward more accessible and less risky career paths, including state government jobs through the Meghalaya Public Service Commission (MPSC), banking, teaching, entrepreneurship, or NGO sectors. These options often offer quicker stability with lower opportunity costs than the multi-year UPSC preparation grind, which carries no guaranteed outcome.
Third, foundational issues in the education system create structural disadvantages. Schools and colleges in the state have long been criticized for prioritizing rote learning over the critical thinking, analytical writing, broad general knowledge, essay skills, and personality traits that UPSC rigorously evaluates across Prelims, Mains, and the Interview. This gap becomes evident when candidates face one of the world’s most demanding examinations.
Fourth, the quality and reach of coaching in Shillong remain limited. While local institutes exist, many aspirants and observers argue that they fall short in depth, current affairs coverage, answer-writing practice, mentorship, and alignment with evolving exam patterns compared to established hubs in Delhi, Hyderabad, or even Guwahati. Financial constraints, family obligations, and reluctance to relocate prevent many from accessing top-tier external coaching.
Finally, the high perceived risk deters participation. UPSC preparation often requires 2–4 years or more of intense, full-time effort with significant personal and financial investment. In a context where alternative local opportunities appear more predictable, the gamble feels disproportionate for many.
These factors form a vicious cycle: fewer aspirants lead to fewer successes, which in turn reduces inspiration and role models, further dampening interest. The absence of regular state-level competitive exam calendars, delays in MPSC recruitments, and other local systemic issues also push talent away from viewing central services as a viable primary path.
Calls for change have grown louder. Education ministers, former civil servants, and intellectuals have described the situation as a “wake-up call,” urging reforms such as strengthening school-level analytical education, establishing robust mentorship programs, increasing exposure to competitive cultures, and providing targeted state support for serious aspirants. Some suggest learning from states like Manipur, where limited local opportunities paradoxically drive higher focus on central exams.
Ultimately, Meghalaya’s UPSC drought is not a reflection of individual talent shortages but a systemic ecosystem challenge. Addressing it will require collective introspection, policy shifts, and a cultural shift toward embracing the long, uncertain road to national civil services—while balancing it with the state’s unique strengths and opportunities. Until then, the wait for the next breakthrough continues.
About The Author
