top of page

By:

Pravin Patil

31 January 2026 at 12:59:27 pm

When Integrity Becomes Institutional Strength

Institutions endure not only because of their systems but also because of officers like Dr. Shashikant Mangrulkar, whose integrity and leadership earn public trust. Amidst a lot of talk about the election commission and various allegations by opposition leaders of different political parties, there are a few examples of election officials who are handling the tense situations with a much more composed, calm, and balanced manner. Dr. Shashikant Mangrule is one of them. During the Municipal...

When Integrity Becomes Institutional Strength

Institutions endure not only because of their systems but also because of officers like Dr. Shashikant Mangrulkar, whose integrity and leadership earn public trust. Amidst a lot of talk about the election commission and various allegations by opposition leaders of different political parties, there are a few examples of election officials who are handling the tense situations with a much more composed, calm, and balanced manner. Dr. Shashikant Mangrule is one of them. During the Municipal Corporation Elections 2025–26, I had the opportunity to interact with citizens, staff members, and officers at various administrative levels in Nashik. Throughout this process, I met many individuals; however, one officer whose company, work ethic, and perspective on governance left a deep and lasting impression on me was Dr. Shashikant Mangrule. As an officer, his leadership qualities are immediately evident. He does not impose authority by intimidation; instead, he earns cooperation through trust. Valuing every member of his team, offering guidance at the right moment, and responding to mistakes with understanding rather than reprimand—these qualities together define him as a responsible and highly effective administrator. Though gentle and approachable by nature, Dr. Mangrule is firm and disciplined when it comes to work. He demonstrates, through his conduct, how administration can be run by strictly adhering to rules while preserving humanity. His work consistently reflects the belief that governance need not be synonymous with rigidity alone but should balance sensitivity and accountability. This balance is rare and invaluable in public administration. In my experience, Dr. Mangrule is not an officer confined to issuing orders or limiting himself to paperwork. He is someone who first understands the situation of the person before him, listens patiently, and only then arrives at a decision. Whether interacting with an ordinary citizen or an employee involved in the election process, he communicates calmly, with restraint and warmth. In today’s fast-paced and pressure-filled administrative environment, such a humane approach to work is exceptionally rare. On several occasions that I personally witnessed, he did not merely listen to people’s difficulties but took the initiative to resolve them. Whether the problem was minor or serious, instead of avoiding responsibility by saying, “This is not within my authority,” his approach was always, “How can this be resolved?” This positive and responsible outlook deeply impressed me. Experiences on Polling Day Polling day itself brought several significant experiences. At some polling stations, there were technical issues related to EVM machines; at others, minor procedural errors by presiding officers came to light. Each time, after discussing the matter with Dr. Mangrule, he provided solutions that were calm, controlled, and crystal clear. The solutions were acceptable to the affected parties, and they ensured smooth operations during the polling. For a presiding officer or polling agent, election duty may last only a day or two. But observing an officer who studies every stage of the entire electoral process in depth and pays attention to even the smallest details was, for me, a first-hand and close experience. From sealing EVM machines correctly to explaining how to fill various envelopes, which forms to use, and where, he provided guidance that was comprehensive and precise. Concepts such as tendered voting and double voting were explained by him in extremely simple terms. In the event of a technical malfunction of machines, the procedures to be followed and alternative options available were explained with clarity and confidence. Because of this thorough guidance, the voting process was conducted not only in strict compliance with rules but also in a confident and stress-free environment. In my view, it is officers like Dr. Shashikant Mangrulkar who form the true strength of any government department and create more trust between the administrative departments and the public at large. They can be a good bridge to grow belief in government functionaries. The officer I have seen and experienced is, without doubt, a positive, trustworthy, and inspiring face of public administration.

Choosing Marriage, Not Chasing It

In an age rife with unsolicited advice, choosing marriage on your own terms is the quietest and boldest revolution.

Growing up in India, one quickly learns that marriage is less a milestone than a societal mandate, especially for women. That eternal question “Shaadi kabkarnihai?” becomes a rite of passage in one’s twenties, echoing like a ticking clock. By thirty, eyebrows rise. Questions, subtle or not, begin to circle. But here is a quiet truth: marriage is not a deadline. It is a matter of readiness, not age.


And yet, despite this cultural pressure, marriage is not a deadline. Nor is it a measure of success. It is, at its best, a conscious decision made with care, maturity and clarity.


I have been fortunate in this regard. My family never tethered my worth to a calendar. Conversations about marriage did happen, but they came laced with concern, not coercion. I recall one evening over tea, when my mother gently broached the topic. “You also have to get married now,” she said. I asked her for two more years. She agreed without hesitation. Those two years came and went, and she never brought it up again.


That kind of quiet trust gave me the freedom to grow. In a world where many are pushed into marriage simply to conform, this breathing space was invaluable.


I am not opposed to marriage. I believe in it deeply. I intend to marry but only when I am ready, and when I find the right partner. I want to enter that bond with awareness, not anxiety. With choice, not compulsion.


This mindset owes much to the family I grew up in. I’ve seen both love marriages and arranged ones. My siblings made different choices with some following their hearts, while others trusting the traditional path. Each choice was accepted without judgment. That balance of autonomy and support is a rare gift in Indian households.


Much of it came from my mother, a quiet force who taught me that strength need not be loud. Life tested her repeatedly but she met it with calm, dignity and resolve. She leads not with command but with grace and patience. Watching her taught me that real leadership lies in trust, not control.


My sister, too, has been a pillar. Together, she and my mother formed a kind of buffer around me by deflecting societal noise and letting me live on my terms. They handled the questions so I didn’t have to. That unspoken solidarity gave me the confidence that no matter what others said, I knew I had my people behind me.


This is perhaps why I’ve never felt pressured to ‘settle down.’ I’ve seen too many women marry early not because they were ready, but because they were told their time was running out. Warnings about fertility. Whispers about respectability. Marriage treated not as a partnership, but a panic response.


Yes, biology plays a role. But marriage is not simply about reproduction; it is about building something lasting with someone who understands and grows with you.


And today’s women are not who they used to be. We are not our grandmothers or even our mothers. We are independent. We chase ambition. We travel alone. We rebuild ourselves after setbacks. Some of us are still figuring out who we are. And that, too, is perfectly valid.


Let us also be realistic: if early marriages fail, so do late ones. There is no formula for a successful union. It is not about when you marry, but whom you marry and why. A well-timed union with the wrong person will still unravel but a delayed one with the right partner can be life-changing. What matters is alignment.


The truth is that a good marriage begins with a good sense of self. One must know who they are before they can know who to share a life with. Marrying from a position of fear – a fear of missing out, of ageing, of judgment - is a recipe for regret.


This is no anti-marriage argument but something to ponder about. If love arrives early, embrace it. If it takes time, so be it. There is no universally ‘right’ age to marry, only the right moment when your heart and mind are in quiet agreement.


It is time we stopped treating marriage as a finish line, and started seeing it for what it can truly be: a conscious, even spiritual partnership built not out of fear or pressure, but out of clarity, trust and joy.


(The writer is a cybersecurity professional and an avid traveler.)

Comments

bottom of page