The earliest signs of an imminent regime change at the Centre usually show up in the manner in which civil servants conduct themselves. The current environment in Raisina Hill will bear this out. Civil servants, who are by and large confident that the existing political dispensation is set to bow out of office, have already begun positioning themselves suitably. Some of them have started airing their criticism of the problems in the existing policies and what needs to be done to fix them. Others, less adventurous and unsure of themselves, have maintained a low profile and even deferred taking routine decisions in view of the risks of offending whoever comes to power after the results are declared.
And then there are those who are simply playing safe by referring almost everything to the Election Commission and seeking its approval before acting on it. The joke currently doing the rounds among civil servants is that some of them have become so cautious that they are thinking twice before even sanctioning leave applications from juniors and debating if those too should be sent to the Election Commission for its clearance.
Fortunately, the Election Commission has put an end to this tactical game being played by many civil servants. It has advised the central ministries that they should not directly send their requests for seeking its approval for the decisions they intend to take in the run-up to the elections. Instead, they should forward such requests to the Cabinet Secretariat, which would decide on which of the proposed decisions should be sent to Nirvachan Sadan, headquarters of the Election Commission, for its approval. This was a smart move on the part of the Commission. In one stroke, it restored the primacy of the Cabinet Secretariat in the government hierarchy and, at the same time, reduced the huge flow of requests from central ministries seeking its clearance of decisions they wanted to take.
The Election Commission's move, however, has not meant an end to the cautious approach of civil servants. For instance, the top civil servants in the petroleum and natural gas ministry have put the ball in the court of the Cabinet Secretariat on the key question of implementing the government decision of raising diesel price every month by 50 paise a litre till the under-recovery is eliminated. At present, the under-recovery, or the difference between the cost of diesel for the oil marketing companies and its retail price, is estimated at over Rs 5.90 a litre.
In the normal course, the ministry could have gone ahead with the earlier formula of a monthly hike in diesel price by 50 paise a litre, but it chose to put that on hold, apparently on the grounds that the Kirit Parikh Committee had suggested an interim under-recovery cap of Rs 6 a litre. However, the facts are somewhat different and the ministry's move reflected a selective and opportunistic use of the Committee's recommendations.
The Committee, while suggesting an interim subsidy cap of Rs 6 a litre, had also recommended an increase in diesel retail price in one go by about Rs 5 a litre. The petroleum and natural gas ministry has chosen to ignore the more radical suggestion of the Committee, but has justified an embargo on further price hike by citing a section of the recommendations on the interim subsidy cap, since the under-recovery has gone below Rs 6 a litre.
Earlier, the same civil servants decided to refer the controversial question of revising the KG-D6 gas price from April 1, 2014 to the Election Commission, which advised the ministry to defer implementing the decision till the completion of the elections and the declaration of the results. But those who have seen the petroleum ministry's letter to the Election Commission, seeking its views on the matter, point out how cautious and circumspect the officials were while drafting the letter and presenting the case before Nirvachan Sadan. It was clear that no official wanted to get caught on the wrong foot on an issue that had already become a controversial matter with political parties in electoral fray making their stand public either way. No civil servant would take a chance or be anything but cautious in such a situation. And the signal was that civil servants would prefer such a controversial decision to be deferred till a new government was formed.
A couple of days ago, another top civil servant aired his frank views on the recently amended land acquisition law. Without mincing words, he said the land acquisition laws required to be further amended and made simpler if the government wanted manufacturing activity and fresh investment to revive in the country. Remember that the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government had cleared the new land acquisition law, which, however, became controversial because of the many cumbersome and complex procedures laid down for the acquisition of land by industry. A bureaucrat who questions the provisions of the new law now is pretty confident that the ruling party is unlikely to be returned to power. At the same time, his frank statement is likely to be construed as a message of policy change to those who are now confident of forming the next government. This is a clear indication that civil servants are preparing for a regime change at the Centre.
Disclaimer: These are personal views of the writer. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of www.business-standard.com or the Business Standard newspaper
