CAG Flags Irregularities in State Bank of Sikkim Hiring

Audit Flags Irregularities in State Bank of Sikkim Recruitment, Raises Questions on Fairness

A recent performance audit by India’s national auditor has cast a critical eye on a recruitment exercise carried out by the State Bank of Sikkim, pointing to score anomalies and missing records that complicate confidence in the selection process. While the audit does not allege criminal conduct, it documents procedural weaknesses that, taken together, raise concerns about transparency and consistency in public-sector hiring.

The recruitment in question began with an advertisement issued in May 2021 for 26 Assistant Manager posts. According to audit findings, the bank received over 3,500 applications, of which more than 2,200 candidates appeared for the written examination. Sixty-nine applicants were shortlisted for interviews, and final selections were announced in February 2022.

What drew the auditor’s attention was not the scale of the process but the outcomes it produced. In several instances, candidates with comparatively high written examination scores were not selected, while others with significantly lower marks made it to the final list. In one cited case, a candidate who scored well above 120 marks in the written test was not selected, with interview scores not made available for verification. At the same time, candidates with written scores as low as the mid-20s were appointed.

The audit records similar patterns across categories, noting that candidates within the same reservation brackets experienced wide disparities in treatment. Some applicants with written scores ranging from the mid-90s to over 100 were neither selected nor called for interviews, while others with substantially lower scores advanced through the process. In certain cases, the gap between non-selected and selected candidates exceeded 25 marks.

Beyond individual comparisons, the audit highlights broader procedural departures. Auditors noted the absence of clearly defined section-wise qualifying marks, deviations from prescribed ratios for shortlisting candidates to interviews, and inconsistencies in the application of reservation norms. Interview marks—an essential component of the final evaluation—were not consistently produced, limiting the auditor’s ability to assess how final merit lists were compiled.

Equally concerning was the state of record-keeping. Key documents such as evaluation sheets, interview panel details, cut-off criteria and attendance registers were either incomplete or unavailable. In one instance, an answer sheet linked to a selected candidate reportedly did not bear mandatory signatures, pointing to lapses in examination controls.

The Comptroller and Auditor General’s report stops short of recommending disciplinary action, but its observations underline a recurring challenge in public recruitment: when documentation is weak and processes are inconsistently applied, even lawful selections can appear opaque. Experts note that structured oversight, documentation discipline and independent review mechanisms—similar to safeguards emphasised in professional auditing services in india—are essential to ensure that merit-based hiring withstands scrutiny.

As competition for limited public-sector jobs intensifies, the audit serves as a reminder that credibility in recruitment depends not only on outcomes, but on the clarity and integrity of the processes that produce them.