Formal and substantive equality of opportunity ideals only define the methods by which every individual can rise to important positions and posts of the society. But these ideals do not define the extent of inequality that would be acceptable in a society and would also benefit the society. Equality of opportunity would defeat its purpose if all social positions would be equally important and desirable. This issue has been addressed by the adoption of the term “meritocracy” for the fulfilment of Equality of Opportunity. The term “meritocracy” is often misinterpreted in term of fulfilment of the formal and substantive equality of opportunity ideals. But it actually refers to a broader ideal. Thus “meritocracy” actually refers to a society in which besides fulfilling the equality of opportunity, rewards and remuneration are received by those individuals who are capable and deserving. Thus according to it individuals should get what they deserve. Therefore, if this ideal is ignored, the less qualified and less capable may gain what more qualified or more capable candidates would deserve.