:: P.C. Alexander

Devaluation of the All India Services

Dr P.C. Alexander

Recently, I wrote about the growing trend of devaluation of the institution of governor. Now I wish to focus on the erosion of another important institution of Indian democracy, namely the All India Services. The hostile reaction of ordinary people, as reflected in the media comments on the reported recommendation of the Sixth Pay Commission for increased scales of pay to the All India Services, is a clear indication of people’s disenchantment with these services.

It is a well known fact that the All India Services in their present form — with the guarantees provided under Article 311 of the Constitution against arbitrary removal or reduction in rank — would not have been possible without the powerful initiative and leadership of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. Sardar Patel firmly believed that a good All India Service "which has the independence to speak out its mind and which has a sense of security" was indispensable for the unity of the nation and for good administration. It was because of his persuasive arguments that the Constituent Assembly eventually agreed to the creation of such a service.

Once the All India Services started functioning, most senior political leaders came to appreciate their useful role in the smooth transition of the old colonial administrative system to one of development focused on service to common people.

Though initially there were hitches in the relationship between the political class and the senior civil services in several states, by and large the members of the All India Services belonging to the IAS and the IPS succeeded in earning people’s goodwill and trust in the high standards of integrity.

However, in recent years, a major change in people’s attitude towards the All India Services has started showing. We are now witnessing the trend of a steep decline in people’s trust in the integrity and impartiality previously associated with these services. The services still attract some of the best talents in the country and there have been no complaints about the fairness of the selection process. However, in the past, people held the All India Services in high esteem not only for relatively higher standards of efficiency, but more for higher standards of honesty. It is this trust in the integrity of the members of the services that has been rudely shaken in recent years and this has contributed most towards the process of devaluation of the services.

There are about eight million civil servants in India. People in general had got used to certain undesirable practices of palm greasing through "mamools", "speed money" and other such euphemisms for bribery among the lower levels in the civil services. But they could never imagine that senior civil servants, who were expected to cleanse the entire civil service system, would themselves be guilty of corruption. Even though the number of senior civil servants involved in corruption has been small so far, people have started believing that the All India Services, as a class, has lost its "chastity."

Further, when people found that civil servants, against whom serious allegations were made even by their own colleagues through secret voting, got promoted to top positions, they started losing hope about the possibility of eradicating the canker of corruption from the All India Services.

The fact that the services have begun to lose their "independence" to ministers is also a disturbing trend. The "independence of mind" Sardar Patel spoke of was about expressing opinions on the merits of a proposal frankly and fearlessly. Failure to do so by a civil servant is, in fact, a manifestation of dishonesty which is as dangerous to democracy as taking of bribes.

Unfortunately, the new trend among civil servants is of following the policy of least resistance. Some ministers, not bothered by considerations of propriety or fairness in decision making, expect their senior civil servants to cooperate with them by "cooking up" the office notes without pointing out the flaws in the proposal. In Britain, which has been the model for our system of parliamentary democracy, there are clear guidelines for civil servants when they find that a decision taken by a minister involves a breach of law or that it is intended only to benefit some individuals. The civil servant in such cases is expected to convey his apprehension to the higher levels in the bureaucracy so that appropriate action can be taken in time to prevent gross misdemeanours.

If certain important leaders, who held high positions of power in some states, are now facing charges of corruption, a part of the responsibility lies with the senior bureaucrats who chose to be silent when the ministers were indulging in corrupt acts.

This type of indirect participation in the wrong-doings of the politicians has contributed substantially towards the erosion of people’s confidence in the objectivity and impartiality of civil servants.

Corruption, whatever form it may take, among the members of the All India Services may shock people now, but if no action is taken to deal with this problem people will, in due course, develop a permissive attitude towards it, as has already happened in the case of corruption among the lower levels of government employees.

Dr P.C. Alexander was formerly governor of Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra.