The higher echelons of India’s civil services are distressed by the Union Cabinet’s decision to amend civil service rules to give yet another extension to the incumbent Union Cabinet Secretary K M Chandrashekhar. This is not because anyone questions the competence and performance of Mr Chandrashekhar. Indeed, there is universal appreciation for his quiet competence and his impeccable track record as a distinguished civil servant and economic policy-maker, and trade negotiator. However, the prime minister’s decision to overlook the claims of several contenders and seek amendment of government rules to secure an extension for the incumbent has not gone down well with senior civil servants. What was the reason for the prime minister to have taken this decision? Using seniority alone as the criterion would have meant giving a two-year term to an officer on the verge of retirement. On the other hand, merit-based selection would have required going down the ladder overlooking the claims of several officers. The prime minister shied away from either option and chose status quo. His aversion to deep selection based on merit may have been due to the brouhaha caused by his choice of Shiv Shankar Menon as foreign secretary overlooking the seniority-based claims of more than a dozen officers. Some of them challenged the decision in court.
There is a completely outdated obsession with seniority in the Indian civil services. The year of allotment is like a caste identity. It defines the career of officers from beginning to end. This is absurd. No modern organisation is as obsessed with seniority. A modern civil service must move to a more merit and performance-based system of promotion and selection. The Indian civil service must develop new methodologies that enable performers to rise faster and go up the hierarchy. Equally, it is necessary that the government becomes more open to lateral entry, particularly at senior levels of government. There is no reason why more secretaries to the government of India should not come from outside the civil service. Indeed, during Indira Gandhi’s time, she had inducted several competent managers from the corporate world, both public and private sectors, and from academia as secretaries in key ministries. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, like some other economists before him and after, was appointed as the economic affairs secretary, and that too at the age of 44! He should, in fact, revive that tradition and bring in world class professionals to head key ministries of the government, with no attention to age and seniority but only to competence and performance. The civil services in India have become trade union-like, resisting lateral entry on the one hand and extending their claim over newer institutions, including regulatory authorities, academic and other institutions, on the other. Indian administrative, police and foreign services are in desperate need of reform and modernisation. All three services need infusion of competent personnel at middle and senior levels to boost capacity and competence. This can only come from lateral entry based on merit, and not just seniority.
