.png)
The Indian Administrative Service (IAS), has long been viewed as the steel frame for governance in India. The once-highly-held ideals of efficiency and neutrality, have been struggling to stay put and adapt to the complexities of modern India.
Illustration by The Geostrata
The IAS has increasingly come under scrutiny due to its disconnect from its primary motive i.e. service to the nation. This characteristic may have posed challenges to the civil servant's role in fostering national unity and could have contributed to the emergence of social divisions. The very existence of the service becomes questionable.
As for the case of IAS, there is a question mark regarding the recruitment process that occurs through the Civil Services Examination (CSE). Every year, approximately 15,00,000 candidates are vying for a few posts making this a High-risk, high-reward examination and is often criticised for its lengthy and arduous nature.
The opportunity cost of preparing to sit for the CSE is also very high since candidates forgo immediate job and promotion opportunities to secure a highly coveted government job. The addition of the fact that coaching is expensive and the stakes for the examination are high coupled with a dwindling economy and job opportunities puts deserving candidates in a bad position.
The current examination structure involves a three-tier process that takes one full year thus, requiring significant time and resources. A lot of candidates, especially from technical backgrounds, make cross-domain shifts and end up applying for humanities disciplines, often without success. This trend not only creates a mismatch of skills but also means a loss of human capital that could have been better utilised in other sectors.
First and foremost, it is necessary to fundamentally redesign the Civil Services Examination. The generalist approach in the selection system could be reduced probably if the examination process and the services were divided according to the skills and abilities needed. This should be corrected by redesigning the recruitment system to facilitate unique examinations for unique services.
This could involve a two-tier examination process: a primary screening test for all candidates, and then secondary tests depending on the type of service. Such a system would also ensure that candidates are assessed on what they know and can do, not what is contained in a large and frequently irrelevant syllabus.
In addition, there is a need to revive the recruitment system to reintroduce the Lateral Entry system through which people with experience and skills in different occupations can join the IAS at junior middle levels. It would not only bring new ideas into the bureaucracy but also increase the ability of the bureaucracy to address technical issues, like foreign policy, technology, health, and urbanisation.
Given that the preliminary examination currently experiences considerable delays before being conducted, the Union Public Services Commission (UPSC) should consider holding the examination more often, preferably twice a year. Furthermore, the outcomes of the preliminary examination should be considered more preserved, so that candidates can sit the main examination without repeating the whole process. This would not only minimise the opportunity cost for candidates but also increase the number of people who would take the examination.
The IAS functions as a welfare lobby and any legislation that is against this is rejected by the IAS especially legislation that seeks to increase accountability or eliminate privileges enshrined in the constitution. This resistance is worsened by the fact that security of tenure enables even corrupt or partisan officers to stay in office and dismissing them is a Herculean task.
Professionalism is crucial for a modern bureaucracy, yet the IAS has been marked by a low level of professional competence. A large number of IAS officers in their careers work in policy desks where the possession of domain knowledge is critical. However, the current environment does not encourage young civil servants to gain the knowledge or skills they need and, as a result, we have ignorance coupled with arrogance.
The IAS’s operation is hindered by political interventions. Although some upright IAS officers try to contain this trend they get isolated and frustrated through harassment and punitive transfers by local political masters. , especially in states like Uttar Pradesh where administrators’ average duration in office is notoriously short and mass transfers are the order of the day. On the 11th of November 2024, 10 IAS Officers were transferred by the U.P government.
This chronic instability negates the foundational prerequisite of good governance and organisational goals and plans. Certain circumstances have arisen where working officers have faced undue pressure handling matters involving members of the ruling party, thus sometimes encountering a difficult working environment.
To overcome this problem, independent watchdogs have to be introduced to control the IAS officers’ activity and their responsibility for it. Such bodies can be the bodies of citizens’ representatives who can give feedback on the delivery of public services as well as demand the performance of certain officers.
Also, organisations must adopt and practice clear performance evaluation mechanisms. Performance can be measured through efficiency, ethical conduct and appropriateness to the needs of the public. One way of doing so is to establish performance indicators that would allow them to measure the effects of their work on communities, which would help to create an atmosphere of accountability and service orientation.
The idea of increasing accountability is important to increase responsiveness to public needs and to improve the quality of service. The civil servants should be evaluated annually using appraisal by independent teams consisting of professionals like journalists, retired judges, and academicians. This was to be done through an external assessment, which would offer a more impartial assessment and flag up problems.
There should be a guarantee that an officer will serve for 2-3 years and be protected by compensation if they are removed early. Such stability would enable officers to perform their duties efficiently without the propensity of transfers, which would hinder the delivery of good governance.
Indian bureaucracy is considered heavily corrupt and the IAS is no exception. People are blinded by the desire to gain more wealth and penetrate the higher circles of power and this encourages corrupt practices.
This is especially so given that there are hardly any measures in place to hold such corrupt officers to account hence they enjoy a modicum of impunity. Eric Hoffer referred to a brave new world in which official bribery, favouritism, and misuse of power are rife, which earned the IAS a reputation for catering to the few rather than speaking for the many.
That is why a comprehensive approach is needed. Protection of whistleblowers would help those who would like to expose corrupt practices since they will not be fired or demoted. Creating the techniques of civil vigilance would help the public to be involved in fighting corrupt practices.
This would go a long way in strengthening this initiative and providing transparency in the activities of the anti-corruption bodies to make the citizens feel they are part of the fight against corruption. Also, increasing digital governance systems can help decrease corrupt practices because it lessens the chances of having corrupt procedures in administrative management.
The broader governance landscape in India should not merely be premised on bureaucratic efficiency; it needs the political mobilisation of emergent classes, the new bourgeoisie of the Indian economy – the businessmen, professionals and the middle classes – in the task of demanding change.
Community mobilisation and protest actions hold the ability to mobilise and put pressure on the government to respond to queries of governance, and corruption and act as important channels of social change. They not only point out problems but also encourage people to call for responsibility and justice and therefore determine the political landscape.
Besides, a privileged culture of IAS officers creates a further barrier of distance between them and the citizens they are supposed to serve. This VIP culture - a culture of civil servants being treated as privileged beings with access to privileges and resources far afield from the generality of citizens—bridges a huge gap between civil servants and the public they serve.
Therefore, political distrust and socio-economic hopelessness among the masses are compounded due to perceived elite capture and impunity of the state apparatuses on social justice and equity systems.
Engagement of the IAS with the citizens is crucial for the rebuilding of the trust with the citizens and ensuring that the IAS is meeting the needs of the citizens. This can mean constant engagement with the people, engaging feedback to feel the pulse of the people and practices best suited to encourage accountability in leaders. To be specific, through the promotion of public participation in the decision-making process, the IAS has the opportunity to take actions in conformity with the citizens’ needs and wants.
In the face of the challenges that the Indian polity poses for the nation’s governance, it is high time that fresh imagery is given to the IAS as an open-ended service that must be capable of transforming to the demands of people.
The current set-up of bureaucracy, with a colonial mentality and bureaucratised self-interest has to be replaced by a professional and performance-driven civil service. And thus restore its role as an important tool for the country’s development by emerging from the quagmire of outmoded procedures and adopting progressive reforms.
By accepting the changing tides of time, the IAS can foster itself as a responsive and responsible entity by ensuring that it remains relevant and effective in addressing the dynamic situations that the nation faces. As well as reaffirming its role as a servant of the people and commitment towards an equitable society.
BY A SHREYA LAKSHMI
TEAM GEOSTRATA
Important analysis