The last few years have witnessed a resurgence of interest among both scholars and public intellectuals over issues associated with distributive justice and its gravitational orbit of concepts, including the idea of merit and the adjacent vision of a meritocratic society. Nevertheless, despite its centrality for conceptions of equality of opportunity, a merit-based allocation of advantaged social positions has been confronted by a range of objections. Michael Sandel's book "The Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good?" provides a nuanced examination of 'the age of meritocracy' and meritocratic rationality as its key characteristic. It dovetails an elaborated analysis of the troubled legacy of meritocracy with an in-depth elucidation of the various flaws and shortcomings it came to be associated with. This article aims to examine some of the distinguishing features of merit-based allocation of advantaged social positions and the main shortcomings this distributive mechanism has been associated with. The introductory section identifies the most distinctive characteristics of the merit-based allocation of advantaged social positions. The central section reconstructs some of the arguments advanced by Michael Sandel in his book "The Tyranny of Merit" (2020). The concluding section presents the motivational impulse for the book symposium on "The Tyranny of Merit" and the main issues arising out of the discussion between the commentators and Prof. Sandel.