'Deve Gowda was action-oriented'

When I took over as chief secretary of Uttar Pradesh soon after the demolition of Babri masjid, President's Rule had just been imposed. The communally charged situation in UP, indeed all over the country, coloured the first year of my tenure.

The dynamics changed when President's Rule was lifted and Mulayam Singh was sworn in as chief minister, nearly one year to the day after the fall of Babri masjid.

It was perhaps quite appropriate, that the swearing in ceremony should have taken place in the K D Singh Babu Sports Stadium. After all, politics has evolved into the number one spectator sport.

After Mulayam had been formally invited by the governor to form the government, I asked for time to call on him. It was fixed for 8 am on the morning of the swearing in.

Word came to me to bring along the planning and finance secretaries. When we met Mulayam at his residence that morning, he gave me a list of twenty or so 'announcements' that he proposed to make, as chief minister, at the press conference immediately after the swearing in. All of these were populist measures, and had been part of his campaign promises.

As we went down the list one by one, I objected to nearly all of them. Mulayam was quite adamant. The most innocuous of the announcements was to declare Ambedkar's birthday as a government holiday.

I told Mulayam that we already had too many state holidays and that we may instead announce cancellation of a few of the existing holidays. In fact, the public would appreciate that more.

Another item in the list was that the women municipal staff engaged by the municipal corporations in the state for street cleaning purposes should start work at 9 am every morning instead of at 5 am as was the current practice.

The rationale was that they belonged to the weakest communities, and with the women going to work at 5 am in the morning, the children were neglected and could not be readied for school, thus endangering the future of this class of people.

I argued that by 9'o clock the streets become busy and that cleaning would not be possible. Why not ask them to start work at midnight instead and complete their cleaning work by 6 in the morning, in time to get their children ready for school?

Mulayam's reply was that at midnight, their personal safety could not be ensured. He added that, in any case, even starting at 5 am they hardly put in any work! Why not let them start at 9'o clock "" nothing would change "" and this with a twinkle in his eyes.

After the others had left, I mentioned to the chief minister that it was his privilege to select his chief secretary and as and when he wanted my departure, could he possibly give me a week's notice so that I could try to get another assignment in Delhi, and not be summarily left in the cold.

Mulayam looked surprised. He said, there was no question of his asking me to leave "" didn't I know that he owed his post of chief minister entirely to me? I pleaded that I did not understand this, having done nothing to help him. Mulayam said that that was not true. I had organised a tight, efficient and impartial election process.

For the first time, under-privileged people, minorities and the old, who had hitherto been afraid to come anywhere near the polling booths, could come, and did come, to vote.

Mulayam said his analysis of the voting pattern showed that the clean and safe elections conducted that year were mainly responsible for his coming to power. There was no question of asking me to vacate the post of chief secretary. But he agreed that he would give adequate notice in the unlikely event of his asking me to leave.

I found that Mulayam as an administrator was firm, decisive and amenable to reason unless there were compelling political circumstances. We had a working rapport and he encouraged me to express my views.

There were many occasions when I would express disagreement with him in my personal meetings. He would not mind it, and would take my point of view into account. On most occasions, he would in fact, be guided by my advice. However, when his political interest was strong, he would not heed any contrary advice.

Mulayam wanted no lip from any member of the Cabinet; he would have preferred a thirty-item agenda meeting to finish in five minutes. No minister would ever express an opinion when Mulayam introduced an item and the chief secretary would be the only person who would speak, sometimes expressing a contrary view.

On many items, I would stand up and explain why the proposed measure was improper or not in public interest and why it should not be approved.

After hearing me out, Mulayam would say, "We have heard the chief secretary ; I feel it would be useful to get this item approved : any comments?" Pausing for a few seconds, he would announce that the item was approved.

Sometimes, I would mention before the Cabinet that the decision would be reversed by the courts, and that an immediate stay order would be forthcoming.

Mulayam would tell the Cabinet that the chief secretary was perfectly correct, "We will take this course of action "" let the court take the blame for shooting it down."

On occasion the law secretary, A K Srivastava, who subsequently became a judge in the Delhi High Court would tug me by the side of my trouser pocket, indicating that I was going too far in opposing the proposals and it was time to shut up.

One day, during the course of a private discussion, Mulayam asked me why I found it necessary to oppose him so often in front of the Cabinet.

He added, "You have already opposed the measure on file. You have spoken to me also privately before the item came on the agenda. Why did you find it necessary to repeat your points at the Cabinet meeting, in full hearing of all the ministers? They would get the impression that we are not getting on together."

I replied to him that even though I had opposed the matter on file, I found it necessary to express my views in the full Cabinet, as that was the formal decision making forum "" the members present should know the other point of view. It was then up to them to take a decision.

Those prime ministers who have had a stint as chief ministers would tend to have a much better grip over the administrative machinery. The example of Narasimha Rao, arguably one of the more effective prime ministers we have had, comes to mind.

Deve Gowda was in this category too...Morarji Desai and Charan Singh had also become prime ministers after serving as chief minister. Perhaps Morarji lends support to my thesis. Any rule needs to have an exception, and in this case it was Charan Singh.

The converse is also generally true. Those who do not have experience of state politics and administration, especially at the chief minister level, would rarely be effective as prime minister. Gujral and Vajpayee come in this category.

The failure of Rajiv was due to inexperience at both the state and central levels. But then, Indira, seemingly an exception, was quite effective. This was because of her long association with state politics in the shadow of Nehru's political career.

I had the good fortune of working with Deve Gowda and I K Gujral, who were prime ministers during my tenure. I would rate Deve Gowda very high indeed, for his administrative ability and quick understanding. It is a pity indeed that he did not have a much longer innings, as he would have had a significant impact on India's future.

Deve Gowda was much misunderstood "" in conferences and seminars, he would be portrayed as yawning prodigiously, and ever pictured in the midst of forty winks. Having been with him on so many occasions, I can vouch for the fact that he was fully alert and alive to the issues under discussion.

He proudly described himself as a farmer and as a farmer's representative. He had a shrewd political mind and given adequate time, he would have created a strong national farmers' front. Incidentally, I too feel that a strong farmers' front is essential for ushering in rural development in India and for eradication of poverty.

I recall a couple of occasions when he would go out of the way to parade his rural, unsophisticated manners. Once, we were at lunch with a very small group at his residence, which included Wolfhensohn, the president of the World Bank.

As we were discussing the efficiency of bank-aided agricultural projects in India, I saw Deve Gowda assiduously scraping the insides of his bulbous nose with his fingers; proclaiming to his visiting foreign dignitary that he was of rustic, peasant stock.

Likewise, on another occasion, we were again at lunch for a very small group in his residence, this time including Camdessus, the chief of IMF.

I saw Deve Gowda, while still at the dining table at the conclusion of the meal, take a mouthful of water, and gargle it loudly and ostentatiously, and then swallow it; again designed to indicate to the visitors that he was a true son of the soil. Why he sent these signals only he would know but I can say that it was deliberate.

For all these eccentricities, Deve Gowda had an extraordinarily shrewd mind, and his thinking was positive. He was also action oriented. Presiding over a fractious coalition, representing many different points of view, he had the ability to provide support to push through major reforms.

I called on Deve Gowda on the day I took over charge as Cabinet secretary. He was busy that day, and asked me to see him the following evening at his residence, where he spent half an hour alone with me, discussing the things he wanted to accomplish and asking me to help him execute his plans.

What he then said impressed me greatly and I am quoting as well as I can remember. "I have spent many years in state politics, seen a lot of things. I have enough money for my lifetime. God has given me the opportunity, unexpectedly, to serve the country as the prime minister.

I will be completely honest, straightforward and will keep all politics out when national interest is involved. I want you and Satish Chandran (the principal secretary) to help me with my plans. My sons and my relatives will want to exploit my present position to their pecuniary advantage.

They will use their proximity to me, through open and subtle ways, to influence you, and to put pressure on you. I want you to be completely fair and impartial and not oblige them. Sometimes they may speak to you in my presence, giving the impression of my full agreement. I may not at that time be in a position to contradict them, because of my close relationship.

Even then you should ignore them totally. If I need anything from you, I will ask you privately "" but that will be very rare." Deve Gowda was true to his word. He never asked me to go out of the way in any matter, except on one trivial instance, when he explained the reason why he wanted me to stretch a point.

Deve Gowda had full trust in Satish Chandran, his principal secretary. Chandran had been chief secretary in Karnataka much earlier, when Deve Gowda was the chief minister. Some years earlier, he had also held the post of secretary to Government of India.

The reader can well ask again how the system allowed such able persons to reach the top. Blessed with transparent honesty and highly intelligent, he is one of the most morally upright persons I have come across.

Chandran probably represented the ideal civil servant. His analysis was brilliant, based on a sound command of his facts, and he could, in any forum, express his views calmly and cogently, without fear or favour. His stint as chief secretary in Karnataka had obviously given him an insight into Indian administration.

As the principal secretary, he had enough confidence in his own position and himself that he did not have to score brownie points against the Cabinet secretary.

Though he had not held that position himself, he wished to sustain and strengthen the institution of Cabinet secretary "" an extraordinary position to take for an officer in the PMO. On any issue, where both of us agreed, Deve Gowda would concur instantly without a second thought.

In the rare instance when Chandran and I disagreed, Deve Gowda would apply his own mind and if he were undecided, he would side with his principal secretary. Where Deve Gowda had to disagree with both of us due to political compulsions, he would apologetically overrule us, and then gently explain to us that he had no choice.

The tendency of most of the earlier secretaries to prime ministers had been to use their close proximity to undermine the Cabinet secretary and ensure that he did not get too close to the prime minister.

Narasimha Rao, for instance, knew this game being played between his principal secretary and the Cabinet secretaries of the time. He would enjoy supporting one or the other turn by turn, playing one against the other.

Journeys Through Babudom and Netaland Governance in India
By T S R Subramanian
Publisher: Rupa & Co
Price: Rs 395/-
Pages: 344