A K Bhattacharya: Competence pays off

RAISINA HILL

The appointment of K M Chandrasekhar as the new Cabinet Secretary is a shining example.

The trend became noticeable first with the Government's decision to name Revenue Secretary K.M. Chandrasekhar as the successor to B.K. Chaturvedi as the next cabinet secretary. No one within the civil services fraternity or outside could quarrel with that decision.

A 1970 batch IAS officer, Chandrasekhar had a successful stint as India's representative at the World Trade Organisation in Geneva, before serving as the revenue secretary in North Block, where he excelled in keeping controversies at bay even while ensuring efficient revenue collections in a buoyant economy. There were no questions on either his integrity or competence. B.K. Chaturvedi was already on a year's extension after completing his two-year tenure as the cabinet secretary. Chandrasekhar was an ideal choice in every respect.

This meant that the revenue secretary's post also fell vacant and had to be filled. With Finance Secretary Ashok Jha also retiring from service at around the same time, the finance ministry had to look for two key replacements. Not surprisingly, jockeying began among senior civil servants to grab the two coveted posts.

Eventually, the government's choice fell on D. Subba Rao as the economic affairs secretary and P.V. Bhide as the revenue secretary. Once again, the trend became clear. The government was determined to fill its key secretarial positions with only those officers who are both competent and have a clean track record.

Both Subba Rao and Bhide belong to the Andhra Pradesh cadre. Subba Rao joined the service in 1972 and Bhide a year later. Subba Rao worked as a joint secretary in the finance ministry in the early 1990's, when the economic reforms were being initiated by the Narasimha Rao government. Bhide was secretary in the department of disinvestment before taking charge of the revenue department.

With Sanjiv Mishra already in place as the expenditure secretary, the finance ministry now has a virtually new team of secretaries to oversee the implementation of the programmes outlined in the 2007-08 Budget and then to plan for the next one. Two issues, however, still need to be resolved. One, Chief Economic Advisor Ashok Lahiri may soon leave the ministry and join the Asian Development Bank. Finance Minister P Chidambaram will have to finalise his choice as there are quite a few contenders for Lahiri's job. Two, an answer has to be found to the crucial question of who among the three secretaries should be designated the finance secretary.

Going by the convention followed in the last many years, the senior-most secretary is made the finance secretary. Thus, in recent times, K.P. Geethakrishnan and Piyush Mankad were designated the finance secretary even though they were in charge of the revenue department. But this arrangement gave rise to several co-ordination problems. There were occasions when both Geethakrishnan and Mankad felt left out of the loop when key budgetary moves were initiated by the economic affairs department headed by Montek Singh Ahluwalia and E.A.S. Sarma during this period. Before the co-ordination problems could escalate into a major crisis, Geethakrishnan was sent to the International Monetary Fund and Ahluwalia made the finance secretary. In the case of Sarma, the co-ordination problems got worse.

Eventually Yashwant Sinha, the finance minister at that time, had to reluctantly agree to Sarma's transfer out of the finance ministry, a move that forced the latter to quit the service in a huff.

In the finance ministry today, there is no such problem. Subba Rao, the economic affairs secretary, is also the senior-most among all the secretaries. If convention is followed, he should take charge as the finance secretary. There will be no co-ordination problems either. But there is a possibility that Subba Rao may not realise his dream of becoming the finance secretary.

A view gaining ground in North Block favours the abolition of the post of the finance secretary. In recent times, two budgets were prepared and presented without any finance secretary in place "� once in 2001 and again in 2005. So, the practice of designating one of the secretaries in North Block as the finance secretary may well be given up by the present government. Civil servants may not like this and are likely to ask why the finance ministry should receive such treatment when the ministries of home and external affairs continue to follow the principle of appointing one of their secretaries as either the home secretary or the foreign secretary.