T V R Shenoy’s Edit Page article Sahib seat par hai? (The Indian Express, January 2) is an eye-opener on the dismal state of cadre management in the country’s administrative services by the powers that be. These services are meant to provide effective and good governance to the teeming millions of this country for which the taxpayer is paying through his sweat and toil. Treating administrative service personnel as commodities capable of being pushed around or dumped at will is not a recent phenomenon. But this was confined to states ruled by whimsical politicians. This virus has now afflicted the Central Government, and of late, postings and transfers of senior officials have become more pronouncedly whimsical. Things have come to such a pass that the record of Central Government in cadre management is poorer than State governments with the exception of States like Tamil Nadu, which saw four Chief Secretaries in one year. Considering that civil servants kicked around in Delhi are Secretaries to the Government of India, the damage this causes to the country’s governance cannot be understated. The first glaring case of the merry-go-round in Delhi was that of Finance Secretary S. Narayanan, who saw four Secretary level postings in a year. The Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas had four Secretaries in a year. The same record has been maintained by S.S. Dawra and the Ministry of Urban Development respectively in 2002. Treating administrative service personnel as commodities was confined to states. This virus has now afflicted the Centre; of late, postings and transfers of senior officials have become more whimsical. Centre’s handling of cadres is poorer than states with the exception of Tamil Nadu Besides this musical chair of postings and transfers, there are two other areas of cadre management that provide cause for concern: one is the practice that has crept into the empanelment/posting of secretaries and the other is arbitrariness in postings with scant consideration for in-service experience. Until recently, there was an established process of empanelment and review to select IAS officers to man the posts of Secretary to Government of India. During this process, due weightage was given to all the State cadres so that a reasonable regional balance could be maintained while filling up the posts. But now, under pressure, non-empanelled officers are being brought from states and posted as secretaries, disturbing the rhythm of the cadre management. Since most of them are from Hindi speaking states we have the regional imbalance mentioned by Shenoy and the despair of a senior civil servant that ‘‘where administration in Delhi is concerned, we worry about Hinditva’’. The other aberration is equally serious. When the post of additional secretary was created some years ego, it was considered superfluous since joint secretaries were the key functionaries in any department. But at that time, it was stated that additional secretaries would be function as understudies to secretaries, which would enable them to expertly discharge their responsibilities as administrative heads of ministries when they took over. This was welcome because as secretary to Government of India, an IAS officer only had a tenure of three to four years on an average during which he or she has to guide policy decisions of national and international significance. Any experience gained in the same ministry would be of great value to the officer to discharge his or her responsibilities in the national interest. The process of empanelment and review to select IAS officers to man the posts of Secretary gave weightage to all the state cadres to maintain a reasonable regional balance. Now, under pressure, non-empanelled officers are being brought from states and posted as secretaries But in recent years, this important principle has been violated with a vengeance. There are innumerable instances, but a few would be worth mentioning. Ashok Pahwa was Director General, Tourism when his turn came for elevation as secretary and the post of tourism secretary was getting vacant. Instead, Pahwa was shunted out and a greenhorn appointed as tourism secretary. Dhanendra Kumar gained considerable experience in the Ministry of Telecommunications as Additional Secretary but was posted as Chairman of Rural Electrification Corporation in the rank of Secretary and some one else was imported in as secretary. So also with Naresh Narad, Additional Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, who was denied the post of Secretary in his ministry and instead posted as Secretary, Heavy Industry. It is as if in the new scheme of things, experience in a particular field is a disqualification! The lackadaisical manner in which the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) is being managed is the main cause of this malady. The Prime Minister is the Chairman of the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet and more than any one else, the Principal Secretary to the PM has a say in these matters. Ordinarily, the Principal Secretary is a seasoned civilian or professional who should know the secretary level officers by their first name so that he could knowledgably advise the PM on the postings. This important aspect is missing from the present PMO. Hence this serious mismanagement at the highest level of decision making which is adversely telling upon many of our economic, infrastructure and social policies and action. (The writer is a former IAS officer)
