The Indian Civil Service
Needs Servicing
Saumitra
Mohan
In a classical
democracy, it is the elected executive, which is supposed to lead the
Government of the day in terms of charting out a customized path to the desired
development based on the needs perceived and felt by it. However, it is always
the permanent executive i.e. the bureaucracy which not only provides a
semblance of stability between many elected governments which come and go, but
also ensures the systematic execution of the developmental schemes and
programmes as conceived by the peoples’ representatives at the helm of affairs.
That is why, it becomes quite imperative that the latter remain alert to the
tasks and duties assigned. The overall motivation, commitment, efficiency and effectiveness
of the permanent executive are some of the very critical factors, which often
decide the effectiveness of any Government.
Hence, it is very
important that the bureaucracy always remains on its toes to deliver on the
promises made by the Government in keeping with the relevant norms of Good
Governance. The periodic training and capacity building are also important to
ensure that the bureaucracy retains the right attitude and orientation to
deliver various people-oriented services while also upholding the true spirit
of bureaucratic neutrality. The bureaucrats need to walk like a trapeze artist
to maintain a fine balance between the requirements of the ruling dispensation
and democratic opposition without compromising the larger public interests. Whenever
the bureaucracy has failed in maintaining this equilibrium, it has ended up
between the two stools, inviting flak. Of all the things, the bureaucrats
should never forget that with changing times, their role has come to be more of
a facilitator and a coordinator. They need to ensure, as far as possible and
practicable, that most of the services are delivered on an auto mode rather
than requiring their physical presence and active intervention all the time.
As bureaucrats we
often get to hear that it is the bureaucracy, which is actually running the
show in this country. And believe it or not, many of us are often carried away
by this ego-pumping myth. One feels that what the people actually mean by the
said observation is that we actually have a bigger responsibility in running
the affairs of the country than many of us are ever prepared to understand and
appreciate. Most of us also forget the oath taken at the beginning of the
service to serve our countrymen and start behaving like invincible and arrogant
monarchs of the hoary feudal days. Times have changed and so should we. We
should never forget that we are here to facilitate the development
administration in a democratic country to provide the elusive ‘Holy Grail’ of good
governance. And we have to do the same in cooperation with and under the
stewardship of the elected representatives in our ‘first past the post’ system.
Our role ought to be confined to assisting the
latter in realizing the good governance to the best of our abilities and
intentions. And while we do so, we should ensure that the same is done within
the precincts and norms of the relevant rules and laws while also protecting
the interests of all the stakeholders and the larger society we subserve.
Many of us are often
so woolly-eyed to think as if we would never go and would always be here. We
should never forget that we shall soon join the rank and file after our
retirement. So, it is in our own vested interests to cut the rigmarole and ensure
that the overall service delivery mechanism becomes as speedier, transparent
and simpler as possible. The unsavoury experiences we had before we joined the
civil service or we still have in other states or in our dealing with other
departments beyond our own turfs should prompt us to bring about incremental systemic
improvements for better service delivery. We ought to ensure to reduce the pain
and discomforts a citizen faces in getting a particular service in a government
office in keeping with the dictum, ‘that government is the best which governs
the least’. However, many of us love doing diametrically opposite by making the
system further complex and byzantine by further adding on to the debilitating
mumbo jumbo.
The system should
be such which gives less scope for discretion and procrastination and is usually
in consonance with the rational norms and rules of propriety. This is more required
today when we have extended the ‘Right to Information’ (RTI) to every citizen including ourselves in
this country. A good number of us also find the now justiciable ‘right to
information’ quite irritating. But consider its benefits as a common citizen
and the benefits that might accrue to us when we are no longer civil servants
and part of the system through which we now get things done easily for us
simply because of the position and authority at our command. In fact, many of
us have already been availing the same if some of the landmark RTI judgements
are to go by e.g. those pertaining to the now mandatory provision of getting to
peruse one’s ‘annual confidential report’ or ‘performance appraisal report’.
Ergo, we should ensure the better implementation of RTI in keeping with the
spirit of this epoch-making Act.
But more than that
we should all do what we are all supposed to do i.e. to do our assigned duties
with all our dedication and devotion. A teacher should teach, a doctor should
treat and a government official should deliver service at his/her table without
in anyway becoming arrogant, inaccessible or difficult. This is required more
so at a time when people have become more ‘rights’ conscious and educated,
thanks to the reasonably successful functioning of the Indian democracy. Doing
thing in any other way may actually invite us trouble, going by the way RTI has
come up or the way media breathes down our throat. Goethe was right when he
said that ‘let everyone clean his house and his surroundings properly and the
entire world would be clean’. So if everyone does one’s job well, the overall
governance is bound to improve.
We should positively
think of ourselves as God’s ‘chosen ones’ a la celebrated social scientist Max
Weber. The Almighty has given us an opportunity and privilege to serve our
countrymen at the expense of millions of our co-citizens. Lets’ make the most
of this opportunity and leave our footprints on the sands of time as Henry
Wadsworth Longfellow would have said. If we all strive for excellence in all walks
of life, we can see the systemic and cascading changes everywhere. This is also
a constitutional requirement in keeping with our fundamental duties as
enshrined in article 51A, Part IV of our Constitution. Our attitude to work and
to the service seekers i.e. the citizens must change. Only then can we actually
be a great country where each of our citizens can live a dignified life without
in anyway much depending on people like us. We shall grow or perish together.
As permanent executives, we have greater responsibilities to shoulder. By not
treating our people well, we are putting the same society at a danger of which
we are also members. So, lets’ take another oath today to improve the system as
much as possible if we wish to retain the sheen and shine
of the celebrated ‘steel frame’.
3 comments:
I agree.
Traditionally, I find that in some situations our jobs, particularly in places like the Secretariat are more or less discretionary, meaning thereby – you can go either way. Laws or the loopholes are such nice things that chances are that decisions may be vary diametrically opposite with equally strong justifications. This risk is prevalent whenever you are clarifying a policy. It can be deliberate or can be a mere act of forgetting what decision was taken on a previous file.
I suppose we must try to evolve out check lists for granting a prayer and must stick to it, but the pressures are too many to twist or bend the rules for benefiting a particular person. Mostly it is considered as a pious task to lower down the branch so that the fruit can be picked up by the favoured person.
Secondly in running the administration we have to depend on more persons than on the systems. People are considered indispensable in their respective chairs. Decisions and processes are sometimes more memorised than written.
Hence, if someone goes on leave or gets superannuated or transferred we notice hiccups to deliver the goods.
System should be objective rather than subjective.
I agree.
Traditionally, I find that in some situations our jobs, particularly in places like the Secretariat are more or less discretionary, meaning thereby – you can go either way. Laws or the loopholes are such nice things that chances are there that decisions may be vary diametrically opposite with equally strong justifications. This risk is prevalent whenever you are clarifying a policy. It can be deliberate or can be a mere act of forgetting what decision was taken on a previous file.
I suppose we must try to evolve out check lists for granting a prayer and must stick to it, but sometimes it is considered as a pious task to lower down the branch so that the fruit can be picked up by the favoured person.
Secondly in running the administration we have to depend more on persons than on the systems. People are considered indispensable in their respective chairs. Decisions and processes are sometimes more memorised than written.
Hence, if someone goes on leave or gets superannuated or transferred we notice hiccups to deliver the goods.
System should be objective rather than subjective.
The ethos of bureaucracy rightly defined in the current socio-economic set up to maintain the standard of good governance. While bureaucracies still trace their origin in the works of Max Weber, enunciating ideal types of public administration and governance; they end up playing up to political system, still hobnobbing with the doctrines of Machiavellian.
The public system has now become vestige of ideals; once glorious - now pejorative. Of late, there has been marked improvement in the system mainly under the imperatives of liberalization; however, governance is still illusive, and there is no semblance of effective and fair administration desired of bureaucracy. It is difficult to understand why in the same system: only few have succeeded, remaining sweeping the oath under the carpet to advance their ulterior motives.
The question is not about how bureaucrats should adjust in the bitter political dispensation (maintaining neutrality), the more fundamental is what can ensure the integrity of the person at the helm of the affairs. Ideally every political dispensation relies on rhetoric slated to benefit people at large. Who collude with them – let them go away with the public funds. Bureaucratic administration means fundamentally domination through knowledge (according to Max Weber); however, the same knowledge is being channelized to advance the motives of petty politicians to protect their personal interest. There are only two set of people who do of their own accord: one who believe that he is going to die next moment and another who believe that they will never die. If bureaucrats are permanent while politicians can come and go; then what is the need for aligning with political dispensation, why not adhering to the truth and oath of integrity.
While periodic training and capacity building are important to cope with changes, there is urgent need to wake up the conscience and instill transcendental philosophy to realize the futility of temptation of this physical world.
Post a Comment