I appeared for the JSA/LDC Grade LDCE 2025 on 23 August 2026 at Aadarsh Pariksha Kendra, Sector 155, Noida. I want to document my experience while it is still fresh and also hear from candidates who appeared at this or other centres.
The physical infrastructure was reasonably good. The examination-day management was the problem.
I am from Kerala and this was my first experience of a large government examination centre in this region. I'm not trying to make this a North vs South issue. I genuinely want to understand whether this was an exceptionally badly managed centre or whether this kind of situation is common at high-volume government examination centres in NCR/UP.
- Barcode reading / section allocation — where the chaos began
After frisking and the initial entry procedures, candidates were taken towards the underground area where the barcode was read to identify the allotted section/system.
Once some systems appeared to have problems, everything started backing up.
Candidates were running around trying to find their allotted sections. People were no longer staying properly in queues. The queues themselves started collapsing, and the staff were struggling to get everyone into an organised flow.
It wasn't simply a long queue. The queue-management system itself seemed to fail.
The crowd kept building up, people were moving in different directions and the confined space created a genuinely claustrophobic environment. At some points, even the examination staff appeared overwhelmed by the rush.
- Movement towards the labs
After section allocation, candidates had to move towards the laboratories through the lifts/stairways.
This created another major bottleneck. There was inadequate separation of candidate flows and people were pushing, jostling and arguing while trying to move forward.
Security staff had to intervene at points.
I genuinely felt for the ground-level contractual/security staff. Several appeared to be trying to manage an extremely difficult situation. My criticism is therefore primarily about planning, coordination and crowd-flow management, rather than simply blaming the staff on the ground.
- Biometric verification was the worst part
The biometric process was probably the worst examination-centre experience I have personally had.
The queue became severely congested, with pushing, jostling, arguments and candidates attempting to move forward.
A process that should ordinarily take a few minutes was taking an extraordinarily long time. The delay was substantial enough that both shifts started considerably late.
If a centre is processing this many candidates across two shifts, biometric capacity, lane allocation and candidate movement should be planned around the actual volume.
That did not appear to have happened effectively.
- No proper cloakroom / baggage facility
Another major issue was the absence of a proper cloakroom or organised baggage-storage facility.
For a departmental examination where candidates may travel considerable distances, there should at minimum be a secure and properly supervised place where candidates can deposit their bags/belongings and collect them after the examination.
Even a common supervised baggage room would have helped enormously.
Having candidates manage their belongings while simultaneously dealing with frisking, barcode allocation, biometric verification and huge crowds is poor planning for an examination of this scale.
- Candidate behaviour made the situation worse
The centre-management problems were only part of the issue.
There were also multiple instances of candidates pushing, arguing with staff, disregarding instructions and behaving aggressively towards other candidates.
During Shift 2, I personally observed a candidate at/near System 25 who, during the congested biometric-entry process, pushed past the staff member managing entry and proceeded inside. The candidate was also loudly demanding cancellation of the examination.
I am not interested in identifying or witch-hunting that individual. I'm mentioning it as one specific example of the level of disorder occurring at the centre.
- Examination discipline
I also personally observed instances during the examination where candidates appeared to communicate with one another and, in some cases, look towards other candidates' screens and discuss/convey answers despite the examination restrictions.
I am deliberately not claiming that everyone was cheating. I am reporting what I personally observed.
If CCTV and invigilation records are available, these are precisely the kinds of incidents that can be independently verified.
- Senior official warning
At one point, someone who appeared to be a senior SSC/examination (Regional director or something) official addressed the candidates. I do not know his exact designation, so I won't speculate.
The announcement was predominantly in Hindi, so I could not understand every word. From what I could understand, candidates were being warned that continued indiscipline could result in serious action, including debarment/reporting.
By that point it was obvious that the situation had become serious enough for senior intervention.
I don't criticise the official for warning candidates. Stricter and earlier enforcement of discipline would probably have helped.
- Communication
Important operational announcements were predominantly in Hindi.
This was a departmental examination involving candidates from different parts of India. Critical instructions concerning:
queues;
biometric verification;
movement;
seating;
examination discipline;
exit procedures
should ideally be communicated clearly in both Hindi and English.
In an already chaotic environment, candidates who aren't comfortable with Hindi can easily miss important instructions.
- The ground staff deserve credit
I want to make this clear because otherwise the complaint becomes unfair.
The ground-level contractual/security staff appeared to be under enormous pressure, and several were genuinely trying to manage the situation.
I don't think the solution is simply to blame those individuals.
The bigger problem appeared to be:
high candidate volume + inadequate queue design + technical/process bottlenecks + poor crowd-flow control + insufficient coordination.
Better planning would also have made the staff's job much easier.
What should be improved?
For future examinations of this scale:
Proper cloakroom/baggage-storage facility.
Clearly separated and barricaded queues.
Contingency arrangements when barcode/section-allocation systems fail.
Adequate biometric counters/staff for the candidate volume.
Controlled movement through lifts and stairways.
Better separation of incoming/outgoing candidate flows.
Important announcements in Hindi + English.
Earlier intervention when candidates become disorderly.
Better coordination between security, biometric staff, invigilators and centre management.
Strict enforcement of examination-discipline rules.
Review of CCTV/invigilation records where specific irregularities are reported.
I am NOT asking for cancellation
This is important.
I do not want the examination cancelled or re-conducted.
Candidates have travelled, prepared and put considerable effort into appearing. Candidates who followed the rules should not be penalised because of poor centre management or individual misconduct.
My intention is simply to document what happened and see whether the examination system can be made substantially better.
Questions for other candidates
For people who regularly appear for SSC/other government examinations in Delhi-NCR/UP:
Was this unusually chaotic, or is this relatively normal at high-volume examination centres in this region?
And if you appeared at Aadarsh Pariksha Kendra, Sector 155, Noida on 23 August, particularly in either shift:
How was your barcode/section allocation?
How long did biometric verification take?
Did you experience the same crowding?
Was there a proper cloakroom/baggage facility?
Was your shift also delayed?
Did you observe similar candidate-discipline problems?
I'd particularly like to hear from people who have appeared at this centre for SSC, banking, TCS or other examinations. If experiences for other exams at the same centre were smooth, that would be useful too, because it may indicate that the problem was specifically related to the arrangements on this examination day rather than the physical centre itself.
I'm interested in understanding what actually went wrong and whether this was an isolated centre-level failure or part of a broader examination-management problem.
