In this essay we will discuss about bureaucracy in India. After reading this essay you will learn about: 1. Bureaucracy in the Past 2. Functions of Bureaucracy 3. Uncommitted Bureaucracy 4. Classification of Public Services 5. Union Public Service Commission 6. Significant Features of Civil Services in India 7. Problems of Bureaucracy 8. Causes Responsible for the Increase of Strength of Bureaucracy and Other Details.
List of Essays on Bureaucracy in India
Essay Contents:
- Essay on Bureaucracy in the Past
- Essay on the Functions of Bureaucracy
- Essay on Uncommitted Bureaucracy
- Essay on the Classification of Public Services
- Essay on the Union Public Service Commission
- Essay on the Significant Features of Civil Services in India
- Essay on the Problems of Bureaucracy
- Essay on the Causes Responsible for Increase of Strength of Bureaucracy
- Essay on the Right to Strike by Civil Servants
- Essay on the Elite Character of Bureaucracy
- Essay on the Criticism against Bureaucracy
1. Essay on Bureaucracy in the Past:
In a parliamentary form of government bureaucracy plays a very big role in running state administration. It is supposed to help political bosses, who frequently come and go and have no expertise of the work of the department which they head, and also in framing and formulation as well as execution of policies.
A good bureaucrat is supposed to be impartial and not influenced by political upheavals which come from time to time. To every government he is supposed to provide very accurate information to the best of his knowledge and ability. He is supposed to work in accordance with the provisions of the law, without caring for the whims and wishes of politicians who might try to unduly use their influence on him.
He is required to be politically neutral.
Civil Services during British Rule:
There was no time in Indian history when civil servants did not play their role. Their role, however, considerably increased in India during the period of East India Co. as well as during the time when Indian administration was transferred from the Company to the Crown.
Only few thousand selected top bureaucrats, under the direction of Secretary of State for India in England, governed India for about a century. Top civil servants were then called ICS (Indian Civil Service) officers. In practice they were, however, neither Indian, nor civil nor servants.
They were not Indian because hardly any Indian was taken in it and they never worked in the spirit of serving the people of India. They ordered like military officers and ensured that their orders were promptly and faithfully executed. Since all policies were framed in England with British interests in view, therefore, these people cared more for the interest of England than India.
At that time the role of bureaucracy was negative. Success of a bureaucrat was measured in terms of his making national movement a failure and his success in dividing major Indian communities so that these did not come closer and nearer to each other, and also that British authority in India was not challenged.
Civil Services after Independence:
The role of civil services, however, considerably changed after independence and since then there has been a continuing change. This change came because in free India, every successive government has been committing itself to the task of bringing social, economic and political changes and is to face the electorates at regular intervals.
It is to satisfy them with its performances and the extent to which promises made at the time of elections have been actually kept by putting into practice. One important reason for not good performance in 1967 elections of ruling Congress party was that whereas the party had made lofty promises in its erection manifesto in practice these could not be kept.
In achieving targets and execution of policies, most willing co-operation of bureaucracy is not only essential but unavoidable.
2. Essay on the Functions of Bureaucracy:
Bureaucracy, in a Parliamentary form of government, plays a very big role and has various functions to perform.
In the words of Ogg, “It is this great body of men and women that translates laws into action from one end of the country to the other and brings the national government into its daily contact with the rank and file in the country less in the public eye than the Ministry, this army of functionaries is not a bit less necessary to the realisation of purpose for which government exists.”
In India bureaucracy has always played a big role but its control has considerably increased since independence, as the state has taken upon itself many functions which it did not perform in the past. In policy matters top civil servants, like the Secretaries and Joint Secretaries, are always consulted by their Ministers and they help them in actual realisation of objectives and the implementation of plans.
In the words of Ramsay Muir, “The power of this bureaucracy, the permanent civil service, is to be found not only in administration, but also in legislation and finance, it not only administers the law, it largely shakes them; it not only spends the proceeds of taxation, it largely decides how much to be raised and how.”
In administration it is bureaucracy which implements laws enacted by the Parliament and state legislature or any elected body. It is because the Ministers who are supposed to see that laws are being implemented in the spirit in which these were enacted, have neither time nor necessary expertise to accomplish this task.
They can only lay down general guide-lines and where necessary give directions, but implementation is necessarily the responsibility of the bureaucracy. It is in implementing the laws that bureaucracy plays big role. It can both uphold as well as frustrate the spirit in which law is enacted. Thus, it can bring fame as well as defame to the politicians.
In the legislative field also bureaucracy plays a big role. It prepares bills, which in its opinion should be passed by the Parliament or for that matter by any elected body. It provides necessary details for legislative work.
It is this body which suggests arguments to be advanced while introducing a bill on the floor of the House to meet the criticism of the opposition. It provides basic material to political bosses for refuting every argument which may be advanced against any provision of the bill.
But in this regard it may be pointed out that much depends on the personality of the Minister. A powerful Minister will dictate the civil servants of his department whereas a weak Minister may depend on bureaucracy and be dictated by it.
In the legislative field the system of delegated legislation has come to stay, which has again increased the power of bureaucracy. Under this system, whereas laws are passed by the Parliament, details are essentially to be worked out by the civil servants. They draft rules and regulations and enabling clauses, which infuse blood in the skeleton of the laws passed by elected representatives of the people.
In the judicial field, bureaucracy also plays a big role. In many cases civil servants enjoy quasi-judicial powers. Departmental heads punish their subordinates for their mistakes. In many cases, they are the members of tribunals and their decisions are final and binding on the disputing parties.
Viewing the growing importance of bureaucracy Lord Hewart once said that, “It was a new form of despotism, which at once and at the same time places government departments above the sovereignty of Parliament and beyond jurisdiction of the courts.” In every parliamentary form of government the role of bureaucracy is very much increasing and is likely to still more increase.
In India bureaucracy also performs financial functions Budget proposals are really worked out by the bureaucrats, though political bosses give directions for the same. It is on the suggestions of bureaucrats that Parliament modifies or removes an existing tax. Out How of funds and inflow of financial resources is regulated and monitored by bureaucracy.
It also watches that the money is being spent for the purpose for which it was approved by Parliament and also that there is no extravagancy in spending, there is also no waste of money or leakage of funds.
An important role is played by bureaucracy in developmental activities, on which maximum stress is being laid these days. It ensures that all material are being fully exploited for collective welfare. Since many industries have been nationalised by the state, therefore responsibility of bureaucracy has still more increased.
It ensures that gaps in social and economic fields do not increase but very much narrow down. It is altogether a different issue that bureaucracy has failed to achieve this objective and the gap between different sections of society has widened.
3. Essay on Uncommitted Bureaucracy:
Under the existing system bureaucracy is required to be politically uncommitted. No bureaucrat is expected to approach politicians for any purpose and he should be above political upheavals. He should be loyal to political bosses to whatsoever political ideology they may belong.
He should supply them correct information which can help in policy formulation. But the question is whether under the present circumstances and conditions in which bureaucracy is placed, can it remain value free, neutral and uncommitted?
The task is really difficult because:
Firstly, because those who become part of bureaucratic system, at any level, are supposed to be educated and well informed. They are expected to compete in written and oral tests. In addition, they are expected to be politically conscious. In case they are expected to be well informed, they are supposed to have their own political view point as well.
They are likely to appreciate and dislike some political ideology and view point, which is likely to reflect directly or indirectly in its working as well.
Then another factor is that politicians approach the bureaucrats in their own interest, to get both favours as well as information. Similarly the bureaucrats approach the politicians, though indirectly and through some one, to get their cause pleaded in the House or before a Minister or their departmental head. In this way there is identity of interests which is likely to effect political neutrality of the bureaucrats.
These days this closeness is more and more increasing because both the politicians and bureaucrats feel that they cannot work without each-other. It is well known that politicians have become so powerful that they can make or mar the career of the civil servants. They can quickly cross promotional ladders, if they enjoy political patronage.
Bureaucracy has become an organised group and like other similar groups, this group also feels that unless it has political patronage, it will not be heard. They, therefore, as a group, try to go near the politicians. The latter, in their own interest are interested in coming nearer to this organised group, which is, of course, divided at different levels.
In several such groups, politicians, belonging to different political parties, are elected as Presidents and other office bearers and thus, try to induct politics, which the interested group accepts in its own interests.
No developmental work can proceed smoothly unless bureaucrats and politicians come very close to each other. When closeness is pre-requisite for development then how can it be expected that a bureaucrat will remain politically neutral? These days because of democratic decentralisation this closeness has still more increased and gone to the lowest village level.
4. Essay on the Classification of Public Services:
India being a federation, has clear division of subjects, in which subjects listed in the Central list are to be manned and managed by a separate set of people, whereas those listed in the State list are to be controlled by another set of civil servants.
Whereas the former will be recruited by the cent al government with the help of Union Public Service Commission, the latter by the state governments with the assistance of respective State Public Commission. There is also a separate All India Service, which is common both to the centre and the states.
i. Central Services:
There are certain subjects which are under the charge of central government e.g., Defence, Foreign Affairs, Railways, Posts and Telegraphs and so on. It is the responsibility of central government to see that these subjects are run, managed and controlled efficiently.
For this officers engaged in these services are in the exclusive employment of Union Government. Their service conditions, mode and method of recruitment promotion and salary scales are decided by the central government.
ii. The State Services:
There are several subjects which are mentioned in the state list. These include police administration, sales tax, land revenue, forests, etc. Those who are required to control these subjects are recruited by the states themselves.
Their methods of recruitment, conditions of service and salary scales are not uniform and differ from state to state. Those states which are economically well off pay better emoluments than the other states.
iii. All India Services:
In civil services most covetous are All India Services. It is a new feature of our services system as the members of these services are common to both the centre as well as the states. The people to these services are recruited on all India basis and can be posted both at the centre as well as in the states. In the constitution there is a provision for the setting up of Indian Administrative Service as well as Indian Police Service.
The Parliament is, however, empowered to create more services, if need be. A new All India Service can be created only with the approval of the Rajya Sabha. Such a resolution creating a new All India Service must be approved by a majority of total membership of the Rajya Sabha and by two-thirds majority of members present and voting.
Indian Economic Service, Indian Forest Service, Indian Medical and Health Service have been created by this method. At present there are several All India Services e.g., and so on.
Indian Administrative Service (IAS)
Indian Foreign Service (IFS)
Indian Police Service (IPS)
Indian Audit and Accounts Service (LA&AS)
Indian Railway Service (IRS)
Indian Income Tax Service (IITS)
Indian Forest Service (IFS)
As already pointed out those belonging to these services can be posted to any state and a limited number of state officers are also posted at the centre to have quite a good and fair knowledge of working of central government and its approach to national problems.
It is expected that these postings and transfers will be only for a limited period and that too purely on merit without interference of political bosses and politicians. But in some cases, prima facie certain transfers in the past have been made on political considerations, which was never the intention of constitution fathers.
5. Essay on the Union Public Service Commission:
Efficient running of administration of the country as a whole and its various departments very much depends on its civil servants. A person who is once recruited to civil services continues on his job till he has reached age of retirement.
In case some wrong choice of a person is made either under political pressure or due to some other reason such an employee is likely to prove a liability. He can give wrong advice, which can land the country and much more his boss in serious trouble.
It is, therefore, most essential that only competent and qualified persons, most suited to the job should be selected. This can be possible only when those who are doing the difficult task of recruiting the civil servants are politically impartial and above the pressure of politicians and are quite well paid.
It is also essential that they should enjoy security of service and should not be under the fear of removal, in case a person not suited to political bosses is picked up by them on his merits. Usually civil servants are supposed to be those who are at top positions, but that is misleading.
In civil services are included all those who are responsible for running civil services at any level. Some such persons can be at the top whereas others may be at the lower levels. In India net work of civil servants was not very wide during pre-independence era but has since then his considerably increased, because the government is taking more activities under its control.
Composition of UPSC:
In order to ensure that properly qualified persons are recruited as civil servants, the constitution of India (Article 309) provides that it shall be the responsibility of the legislature to regulate the recruitment and conditions of service of those appointed to public services and posts in connection with the affairs of Union or of any state.
The constitution also provides that there shall be a Union Public Service Commission which shall consist of a Chairman and not more than 8 members. It is, however, left to the President to decide exact number of members of the Commission at a particular point of time and conditions of their service.
It is, however, provided that at least half of the members of service commission shall be administrators who have gained ten years of experience. What shall be the qualifications of other half members of the Commission, about that nothing has been said in the constitution.
It is, however, hoped that these persons shall have progressive outlook and shall be persons known for their integrity. All appointments of the Commission i.e., chairman and members of Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) are to be made by the President, whereas in the case of State Public Service Commission, such appointments are to be made by the Governor of the state concerned.
Every member is appointed for a period of six years but maximum upper age limit in the case of members of UPSC is 65, whereas in the case of State Public Service Commissions it has been put at 62. Thus, removal comes at a point which ever is earlier.
Chairman of Union Public Service Commission is not eligible to hold any office of profit under Union or State Government, but a member of the Commission can be appointed as Chairman of UPSC or State Public Service Commission.
Removal of UPSC Member:
Chairman and members of UPSC hold office during the pleasure of the President but can be removed by him on grounds of established misbehaviour or incapacity. In such cases the matter will be investigated by the Supreme Court and if it is found that the charges levied are true only then the President shall remove the guilty.
But the President can suspend a member of Commission, when enquiry is pending. He can also be removed when he has been declared bankrupt or engages himself during the term of his office in some employment outside the duties of his post or in the opinion of the President it shall not be possible for him to discharge his duties due to infirmity of mind and body.
Impartiality of UPSC:
Under the constitution efforts have been made to ensure impartiality of Service Commissions. It is provided under the constitution that the chairman of the UPSC shall not be eligible for re-appointment to any office of profit after completion of his term of office. The members of Services Commission can hold only other Commission posts.
Their salaries and allowances are not to be voted by the Parliament or the state legislature, as the case may be. Not only this, but these cannot be changed to their disadvantage during their stay in office. Their removal process has deliberately been made difficult and complicated.
One interesting feature of the UPSC in India is that like UK and the USA it has not been created by an Act of Parliament and as such it cannot be abolished by an Act of Parliament. On the other hand, provision for the creation of UPSC has been made in the constitution itself.
In case the Commission is to be abolished it can be done by a constitutional amendment, which, of course, is not an easy process except, of course, when there is single party dominant system in the country and that adopts a hostile attitude towards the Commission.
Functions of U.P.S.C:
Under the constitution UPSC has been given several functions. It is required to advice the President on all matters relating to methods of recruitment to civil services and civil posts. It also advises on all disciplinary matters which affect a civil servant in a civil capacity, including memorials or petitions relating to such matters, as appointments, postings and transfers.
Of course, its most important duty is to select suitable and competent persons for posts which are to be filled up by the Union government and the persons for All India services.
It may be pointed out that the Commission only recommends names of suitable candidates for the posts to be filled whereas appointments are made by the department concerned. It is expected that all higher posts will be filled up on the recommendations of UPSC but the Commissions in their annual reports have been sore that the departments concerned in many cases do not accept their recommendations.
Not only this, but in many cases posts are filled up by the department first and thereafter the Commission is approached to regularise the appointments. Many posts which should immediately come to the Commission are not sent to it but filled up on ad hoc basis, where the persons concerned are continued for years together, thus, the Commission is avoided.
When such a person has gained considerable experience and has an edge over the others, then alone the post is referred to it and efforts are made by the department to get the post filled by the same person on humanitarian and other grounds. In addition to this, the government has set up a large number of autonomous bodies.
There is no Ministry, which has no autonomous bodies under it. In these bodies there are very many senior posts, which carry good, attractive and lucrative pay scales. These bodies are quite competent to fill up these posts by themselves without reference to UPSC.
If requested by two or more states the UPSC assists them in framing and operating schemes of joint recruitment for any service for which candidates possessing special qualifications are required.
Recruitment Procedure:
The procedure for the recruitment to a post to be filled up by the UPSC is, of course, quite elaborate and passes through several stages, namely:
(a) Reference of posts to the Commission.
(b) Advertisement of the Post by the Commission.
(c) Scruitiny of applications by the Commission.
(d) Holding of test if necessary by the Commission.
(e) Interviewing the candidates by the Commission.
(f) Recommendation of names to the department concerned by the Commission.
As soon as the department decides to fill up a post, it refers it to the Commission. Job requirements and qualifications for the post to be filled are decided by the department concerned, in consultation with the Commission.
The posts thus received during the course of week are advertised in leading news papers and usually 4 weeks time is given for sending applications. Usually number of applicants being much more, than the number of posts to be filled up, some criteria is laid down for findings out eligible candidates.
These days one of the methods adopted for selecting suitable candidates is that of holding preliminary tests. In these tests all those who possess minimum qualifications and have applied to the Commission for being considered for the job are called for a written test.
It may be pointed out that tendency in these days is to set only objective type questions so that there is no criticism that there has been under or over evaluation. Those who qualify in the preliminary test and obtain a particular percentage of marks are allowed to sit for the main test.
In some cases, however, the number of vacancies is very limited say one or two and for that no tests are held but eligible candidates are called for interview. In cases where tests are held, those who qualify in the test are called for interview.
Those who qualify in the interviews are recommended to the department concerned for appointment. Thus, main function of the Commission is to pick up suitable candidates for the posts which fall vacant under the central government.
In addition to this, the UPSC also performs certain advisory functions. It advises the government on the methods of recruitment and principles to be followed in making appointments and giving promotions for various posts.
It also suggests about the suitability of candidates and advises whether a person appointed by it has incurred any disqualification or not and has behaved or not in a manner that disciplinary action be taken against him. It also advises the President on a matter which is referred to it.
It also advises about the age of an employee, if there is any such dispute.
It is obligatory on the part of the Commission to prepare an Annual Report on its working and send that to the President who will cause that laid on the Table of each House of Parliament. The President can, however, assign any additional function to the Service Commission.
It is also the duty of the UPSC to assist, two or more states, which might approach it to frame rules and operate schemes of joint recruitment for any services for which candidates with special qualifications are required.
The constitution provides that Service Commission shall be consulted on any claim or in respect of any person who is serving or has served under the Government of India or Government of a State in a civil capacity and that any costs incurred by him in defending legal proceedings instituted against him in respect of acts done or purporting to be done in the execution of his duties, should be paid out of Consolidated Fund of India.
Matters outside the Scope of U.P.S.C:
It is of course obligatory on the part of the government to consult UPSC in all matter relating to recruitments, promotions and transfers, etc., of civil servants but the President has been empowered to make regulations specifying the matters in which Commission may not be consulted.
No references need be made to the Commission on any matter relating to the reservation and appointment of posts for the members of backward classes, scheduled castes and scheduled tribes.
In 1958, the Union Public Service Commission (Exemption from Consultations) Regulations were passed. By these regulations it was provided that it shall not be obligatory for the President to consult UPSC in respect of posts for which the authority to appoint is specifically conferred in the Constitution on the President.
The Commission also need not be consulted in the appointment of chairman and members of any board, tribunal, commission, committee or and other similar authority created under the provisions of a statute or under the authority of a resolution of either House of Parliament or by a resolution of the government for the purpose of conducting an enquiry into any matter, or advising the government on any specific matter.
Other matters on which UPSC need not be consulted also include:
(a) Appointment of Heads of Diplomatic, consular and similar Indian Missions in other countries.
(b) Posts in the secretariat of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha.
(c) Technical and administrative posts in the Atomic Energy Commission.
(d) Judicial and Additional Judicial Commissioners, District and Additional District Judges of Union Territories.
(e) Subordinate Judges of Union Territories.
(f) Class III and IV posts.
(g) Posts connected with the administration of NEFA.
(h) Posts which are temporary or of officiating nature and the incumbent is not likely to hold that for a period not exceeding one year. But in such cases Commission will have to be informed of the appointment.
(i) Posts in respect of which authority of appointment has been specifically been conferred by the constitution in the President.
(J) Personal staff attached to the holders of posts mention in categories and (a) and (i).
(k) Any service or post about which commission feels that it need not be consulted.
6. Essay on the Significant Features of Civil Services in India:
Since independence much change has come in the nature and character of civil servants in India. In fact, the whole outlook has changed. Before independence civil servants were snobs. They had no interest in the welfare of the people. The interests of Indians had no meaning for them.
But since independence their outlook has much changed. Now they fully well appreciate that service of the people is of paramount importance. They now feel that they have big hand and role to play in building new India.
Then another significant feature of civil services in India is that recruitment to all the posts is made not on the basis of caste, creed and religion or even for that matter there is no distinction on the basis of sex. All appointments are made on the basis of ability and worth of the person concerned.
Those who are found most suitable are picked up for the position. Since senior civil servants are expected to do important jobs, therefore, they are given proper training before any job is actually offered to them. Training in one form or the other is given to all public servants.
These days there is also provision for in service training, so that civil servants are fully well aware of day-to-day developments in their respective fields.
Then another significant feature of civil services in India is that civil servants try to become a class among themselves. Since each civil servant holds some position of responsibility and office which he holds also bestows certain privileges on him, therefore, sometimes he begins to suffer from superiority complex. Not very far back a civil servant was a well paid person and enjoyed considerable social respect.
But now people in small business have started earning much more than well paid civil servants, therefore, his prestige is slowly coming down. But in spite of this civil servants always consider themselves as a class and present their demands and needs accordingly.
They enjoy a lot of patronage power and also help those who are known to them, even out of the way. The bureaucracy in India is maintaining its elitist character even after 50 years of India’s independence.
Though public servants are now expected to serve the people and to meet their expectations as quickly as possible, yet there are no means by which they can directly know their expectations. They are not supposed to meet the people in a way in which politicians meet them. Thus, they can know the feelings and expectations of the people only indirectly and not directly.
Top civil servants are supposed to be all rounders. It means that it is expected that they can be posted anywhere and are fit for any and every type of work. Therefore, they are frequently transferred from one Ministry to the other and from one type of work to the other, without any hesitation. Some times the jobs required to be handled by them may not even be of their taste.
Quite often bureaucracy in India is charged with conservative approach to every problem and not prepared to introduce very far-reaching charges. It is said that it simply believes in status quo and as such it cannot be expected of it that it will help in bringing socio-economic changes very quickly or at some considerably good speed even.
Bureaucracy in India is politically non-committed. It implies that public servants have no political bias. All that they are supposed to do is that they should supply information called for from them, to the best of their knowledge and ability to their political bosses. They should not worry who heads the government and which political party is in power. They are supposed to be politically neutral.
Of late, it is being alleged that bureaucracy in India is developing a tendency to help the ruling party in the hope of getting certain benefits out of their patronage. Some influential leaders of the ruling party are liberally given benefits by way of grant of permits and quotas etc.
Not only this, but at the time of elections the bureaucracy helps the ruling party and it is quite often alleged that it helps actively in campaigning and bringing the people to the booths. It is hoped that in case their party and candidates are returned to power, they may get quick promotions.
For quite some time Indian Civil Service personnel were very highly paid people. They were known for their character and integrity. There were rare occasions when they got themselves involved in scandals. But with the passage of time their emoluments have not kept pace with increasing prices and it is difficult even for senior officers to make their both ends meet.
The chances of promotion are very few and being in the fixed income group, inflation and increasing prices very adversely influence them. This, it is alleged, is responsible for breeding corruption in civil services, which is becoming a characteristic of our bureaucracy. After independence in several cases civil servants had to face inquiries for alleged involvement in scandals and corruption cases.
One of the salient features of bureaucracy in India is that after independence it has rapidly expanded beyond its size. The critics have gone to the extent of saying that there are more civil servants than actually required by the country.
Paul Appleby has, however, said that, there are too few employees at the level of Deputy Secretary, Joint Secretary and Secretary. But what need be remembered is that in India after independence state has taken upon itself many responsibilities because of accepting socialistic pattern of society as its goal with the concept of welfare state as its objective. These were bound to bring with it expansion in bureaucracy.
Bureaucracy in India is known for its red tapism, which is quite often un-necessary. The wheels of government machinery move very slowly. The procedures established result un-necessary delays and corruption. The rules are deliberately interpreted in a way by the bureaucrats that these favour their own persons.
The responsibility is shirked and efforts are made to pass on the buck to some one else. The bureaucracy is corrupt and in it there is too much of nepotism and favouritism. It is because of this that bureaucrats have earned the displeasure of common man.
Then another feature of Indian bureaucracy is that various sections of civil services quite often quarrel with each other and thus, they do not work smoothly in a coordinated manner. The sufferers are ultimately tax payer to whom they are required to serve.
Their supremacy has been challenged by technocrats and specialists, which has somewhat weakened their position, though their grip over the administration is still very tight.
It is quite often said and in some quarters also accepted as well that bureaucrats of today are not as efficient as they used to be, particularly during British days. They do not devote their energies in creative thinking but spend their time in non-productive and non-constructive activities.
Then comes another characteristic of bureaucracy, is that it is following the course of least resistance. Among the civil servants gradually an impression has developed that a superior officer will always carry the day, in case there is difference of opinion between a junior and a senior officer, even if the former is in the right.
In many cases the superiors make every issue a point of prestige and they see that their view point is upheld by the superiors.
That being the position each officer thinks in terms of least resistance. He even unwillingly accepts what his superior says. Many in services have, therefore, adopted an attitude of following the course of least resistance. Every officer in the bureaucracy feels like resisting to the extent to which he feels, that is inescapable and which if not done will surely adversely effect his service career.
This policy of least resistance has the advantage because such a person is considered submissive and accepted everywhere by every superior officer.
Elitist character in bureaucracy is another feature of civil servants in India. Once one joins government service or a public undertaking, one begins to feel superior and elite of the society. Each public servant wants to adopt a particular life style and feels that since he can show favours, therefore, he is definitely superior to the others.
Each civil servant functions under certain strains and is faced with several problems, which have been discussed earlier.
Political Neutrality of Civil Servants:
One of the important features of Indian Civil Servants is that civil servants are supposed to be politically neutral. This object has been secured by several ways. Civil servants in India are not permitted to join any political party. They cannot propagate for any party candidate at the time of elections.
Similarly they cannot favour any cause or person on the basis of political ideology or simply because that has the backing of any particular political party. They cannot participate in any political agitation and movement.
They also cannot stand as a candidate for any parliamentary state or local body election. It is always expected of them not to act as polling agent of any party candidate. But as a citizen they have every right to cast vote at the time of election. They cannot express themselves through press or other mass media and also cannot write articles or broadcast talks of political nature on any mass media or platform.
7. Essay on the Problems of Bureaucracy:
Since independence, new problems have come before the country. Before independence top bureaucrats were supposed to maintain a distance between themselves and the masses on the one hand and subordinate civil servants on the other.
They were not concerned with the feelings and aspirations of the people. Now their problem is how to adjust themselves to the new situations and circumstances under which they are supposed to be the servants of the people. They are now required to go near them rather than to keep them away.
Then their another problem is their relationship with the Ministers and politicians. Ministers being the heads of departments are supposed to give policies and directions about the running of the department, though they do not know technicalities of the work.
The politicians are elected representatives of the people and claim that civil servants sitting in easy chairs and coozy air-conditioned rooms do not know what the people think about them. In case they carry out the wishes of the politicians, they might have to go against some of the rules and thus land themselves in difficulties.
Not only this, but politicians from different camps, put such varying and self-opposing demands and pressures, that it is difficult to meet all. In case a bureaucrat, in the honest discharge of his duties, annoys the politicians and Ministers then he is definitely in a disadvantageous position.
What should be relationship of bureaucrat with his political head depends on the personality of individual Minister and Prime Minister. It also depends on the keenness of the Prime Minister to defend his Minister. Prime Minister like Jawahar Lal Nehru and Ministers like Gobind Ballabh Pant, Vallabh Bhai Patel and Rafi Ahmed Kidwai of the old days and Prime Ministers like Smt. Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi and Ministers like Bansi Lal and V.C. Shukla of these days could keep their civil servants under their full control. It was under Nehni that General Thimayya raised a voice against new promotion policy of his Defence Minister V.K. Krishna Menon.
The Prime Minister defended his Defence Minister on the Floor of the House, without caring for the annoyance of Thimayya. But when Gulzari Lal Nanda protested against the behaviour of his Secretary L.P. Singh and tried to hold him responsible for poor handling of demonstrators favouring ban on cow- slaughter, the then Prime Minister defended the Home Secretary, decided to relieve Nanda from the cabinet and went to the extent of saying that it was not always possible to accommodate a Minister about the transfer of Secretaries.
Under Lal Bahadur Shastri, civil servants like L.K. jha dominated the whole show and in all walks of life he dominated the scene. Similarly bureaucrats like D.P. Dhar and P.N. Haksar dominated for some time Indian administrative scene.
During 1975 emergency, R.A.W. (Research Analysis Wing) of Prime Minister Secretariat, Central Bureau of Investigation, Intelligence Bureau, police administration all belonging to bureaucratic system played a big role.
But under Janata rule the role of the bureaucracy very much increased because the government of the day declared that public servants should work without any fear or favour. They should not be influenced by politicians and should get every order in writing.
They should strictly abide by the rules and so on. All this was not bad but what made bureaucracy strong was that the ruling party was breaking down under the pressure of its own weights. It was lacking in giving political directions.
Therefore, the problem of modem bureaucracy is how to deal with political bosses. None can be treated lightly because a light political weight of today can become a heavy political weight of tomorrow. This problem still more increases when there is political instability in the country. A political leader in opposition today can become departmental head tomorrow.
Then his another problem is that he cannot defend himself for his actions on the floor of the House even though he maybe badly criticised for actions for which he is not directly responsible. He is expected to be defended by his Minister.
As long as there is attack from outside the department, the Minister may defend his civil servants, because he heads the department and cannot escape responsibility by saying that department is responsible for it.
But when there is confrontation between himself and his civil servant, he usually defends his actions. As Minister of Foreign Trade, L.N. Misra held his department responsible for giving wrong licence to a Pondicherry firm. Similarly some time back when there was confrontation between Law Secretary and Deputy Law Minister the latter defended his own action rather than that of his Secretary.
This has created a problem for civil servants who find themselves exposed and undefended on the Floor of the House, even if they are convinced that they are right.
Then is the problem of committed and non-committed bureaucracy. Uptil now in India the accepted principle was that of non-committed bureaucracy. Under this concept it was believed that bureaucracy had nothing to do with political upheavals. It was meant simply to implement policies. But after independence new challenges were thrown before political bosses.
On the economic front there was not much success. Targets fixed by the Planning Commission could not be achieved. Wealth got concentrated just in few hands. Gap between the rich and the poor very much widened. Instead of employment in the country, at the end of every plan, unemployment increased.
There was alarming stagnation on the economic front and growth rate on the industrial front was very slow. Politicians have all along held bureaucrats responsible for all this. According to them they are stumbling block on the path of economic development and delay every tiling that is put before them.
It was happening because the bureaucracy was non-committed. Under Prime Minister, Mrs. Gandhi an idea of committed bureaucracy gained ground.
It was argued by some Congress politicians that bureaucracy must be committed to the task of national reconstruction and economic development. In case bureaucracy involved itself in this difficult task, it would not be difficult to quickly reconstruct nation’s economy.
But concept of committed bureaucracy has its own disadvantages as well as problems. The problem of bureaucracy, therefore, is how far it should be committed and to which extent its committed character should be maintained.
Then another problem of modem bureaucracy in India is controversy about generalists and technocrats. For quite a long time it was maintained that a civil servant at the top could fit anywhere and everywhere. Thus, without any hesitation he was shifted from one department to the other. He could be head of both technical and non-technical as well as commercial and non-commercial departments. He was supposed to be all -rounder.
But when India set up and took over many industrial units in public sector, new dams and projects were taken in hand, many undertakings were now to be run commercially, it was found that these were running in loss and badly suffering because top personnel could not give proper directions due to lack of their knowledge on the subject on the one hand and lack of commercial outlook on the other.
The result was that a controversy started. The technocrats claimed that they were in a better position to run the show than the generalists. In many cases they showed their reluctance to work under them. The problem of today is how to establish cordial and working relationship between the civil servants and technocrats and what should be the sphere of activity of each.
Then another problem is the right of the bureaucrats to approach the politicians. Under the existing system the bureaucrats are not supposed to approach the politicians for getting their grievances redressed. All that they are expected to do is to approach their departmental heads and put their problems before them either in writing or orally.
The decision is supposed to be final but appeals can lie in the court of law, where permissible under the rules. But these days in matters of appointments, promotion and transfer, etc., sometime political pressures and influences play their own part.
There is, therefore, an increasing tendency on the part of some bureaucrats to approach the politicians, convince them about their cause, plead justification of their demand and so on. Therefore, a problem is how far should bureaucrats be allowed to lobby with politicians, particularly when there is political interference in matters of promotions and decision making process and so on.
Not only this, but some of the politicians also approach top bureaucrats, seek some benefits for themselves as well as for those in whom they are interested. They try to collect some information and data from them which they can use against their political opponents and in their own favour both inside and outside the legislature.
Even politicians belonging to the same party but belonging to different factions approach the bureaucrats for getting favours of difference kinds. In the words of Bhambri, “All organised groups have their political activity; bureaucracy cannot be an exception.”
Still another problem with which bureaucracy is faced is that of the influence of powerful politicians who are not holding any position in the government but pull wires from outside.
They have hold over those who are in the government and bureaucrats know fully well that any refusal to them will earn the wrath of political bosses in the government e.g., influential political bosses of the ruling party who have considerable influence on the Council of Ministers.
They have no responsibility and are accountable to none for the wrong consequences of the decisions taken but wish that their desires should be obeyed as command. It creates very difficult situation for the bureaucrats because they are held responsible, without any protection, for the wrong decisions taken under the pressure of such politicians who are not even in the government.
Then another problem for the bureaucrats is court pronouncements. In several cases the Supreme Court has given judgment on petitions filed by a petitioner asking the government to take a particular type of action within a specified time period. But in our system no decision can be implemented unless political bosses give their nod to the action to be taken.
But when action gets delayed the bureaucrat is held responsible and punished.
It was under court order that a Secretary level officer of Karnataka State government was jailed in 1995. Again in November 1995 court ordered that action should be taken against five IAS officers connected with Skipper construction company, Delhi case. The examples can be multiplied.
8. Essay on the Causes Responsible for Increase of Strength of Bureaucracy:
Bureaucracy is becoming more and more powerful these days and there is a visible tendency that its role is likely to become more important.
It is due to several reasons. Some such reasons are:
(1) The Ministers, who are departmental heads frequently come and go. But civil servants continue to stay in the department and thus become depository and store House of all knowledge.
(2) The Ministers have no technical expertise and much knowledge about the work which as departmental heads they are supposed to handle. But civil servants have technical knowledge and can go deep into every detail of the work and can pin point where the things can go wrong.
(3) The Ministers can give only .policy directives and guide-lines. They have no time to go into all details of the matter on which a law has been enacted. Legislative work has so much increased that it is difficult for the Minister to even cope with that. As more and more activities are being undertaken by the state, with that legislative work too is increasing.
It is, therefore, unavoidable for the Minister to leave much to the care of the civil servants.
(4) All detailed information, statistical data, basic information for the formulation of any proposal can be obtained only from the bureaucracy. Therefore, every Minister feels the need and necessity of getting the co-operation of civil servants.
(5) Strength of civil servants has also considerably increased because they have organized themselves into a united bodies and thus their bargaining capacity has very much increased.
(6) Political level activities of the Ministers have very considerably increased. Every Minister is always busy both in improving the image of his political party as well as his own image in the party. They hardly find any time to give detailed directions to the civil servants, but remain satisfied what their permanent servants do to keep the department running smoothly.
Civil Servants and Ministers:
Whereas the people have a grievance that in the services there is too much of corruption, the bureaucrats complain that there is too much of political interference in their day-to-day working. They argue that they are not allowed to take decisions on many issues on merits. They seek all types of favours for their friends and relatives on the one hand and their party-men on the other.
They are forced to do all sorts of irregularities and the very concept of objective approach is being wiped out. Not only this but the Ministers get annoyed if any suggestion is put before them or any decision is implemented which is not suited to their taste.
There is a tendency on the part of political executive heads of the departments to have favours only on verbal orders and if any thing goes wrong they expose the civil servants to public criticism and hold them responsible for wrong decision and do not boldly own responsibility for their verbal orders.
The difficulty of the bureaucrats, they say, is that they have no means to defend themselves in the public or in the Parliament.
The civil servants on their part, in order to win favours, go to the maximum extent to adjust the wish of the Minister, even out of the way.
9. Essay on the Right to Strike by Civil Servants:
A problem which is drawing attention these days is as to whether civil servants should be allowed to go on strike. Insofar as private sector is concerned, this right, is fully well extended. It is believed that the workers should have this privilege for getting their demands met from their employers who are otherwise exploiting them.
But the position is different in the public sector. It is argued that in public sector employees should not be allowed to go on strike.
The main reasons advanced are that strike is disloyalty to the state and the government activities are of monopolised nature and thus the state cannot tolerate strikes. It is also argued that there is close relationship between the state and its employees and as such this relationship is seriously endangered by strikes.
These are precisely the reasons that the strikes are disallowed in India, and employees warned by the state not to resort to this method. Many a time the strikes are declared illegal. In France, however, the employees have been given right to go on strike.
Prof. Heman Finer in his ‘Theory and Practice of Modern Governments’ has summarised the issue of strike in three proportions as follows:
(1) “If the state engages itself to give certain benefits to its civil servants and by its institutions and traditions substantiates its engagement, it may as a matter of a fair bargain requiring a corresponding guarantee that it will not be subjected to the inconvenience, at the minimum of a strike.
(2) The interest which the state has in continuous operation of its services are of an urgent, life and death nature, and these must not be stopped lest a great calamity befalls on it.
(3) If the demands of civil servants are given ample constitutional channel in which to find their vent, and if just, their satisfaction, then the strike must be relinquished as a means of forcing the state to surrender.”
Though civil servants are not allowed the right to go on strike yet in all democratic countries they are allowed to form associations and government deals with all those association, which are recognised by it, but they are not allowed to affiliate with outside trade unions.
Similarly these are also not given right to collective bargaining. But at the same time, under certain conditions civil servants are permitted to refer their dispute with their employer to arbitration.
As already said that in India the civil servants are not allowed to go on strike. But in spite of this many a time there have been strikes both in the major and minor public sector undertakings as well as government establishments and offices.
The basic idea of disallowing the employees to go on strike is that the state cannot afford to have employees to disrupt essential services, thereby dislocating the whole national economy and administrative set up, it is also believed that the state employees should get their grievances redressed across the table and through other channels like staff councils and J.C.M. rather than forcing the employees to accept certain demands which are considered reasonable by employees and unreasonable by employers.
Central Civil Service Conduct Rules (1935) provide that no government servant should join demonstration or be a member of an unrecognised association or which believes in violent means for getting grievances redressed.
The rules also provide that through press or platform, no employee should adversely criticise the government and no government servant should bring any political pressure on getting his demand accepted.
Third Central Pay Commission which went into the working conditions of the employees of the Government of India recommended that recognition should be granted to associations and unions very liberally. It also recommended that all those matters which can be settled by negotiations„ should be referred to arbitration and that the employees should not resort to methods of strikes or similar tactics as go slow.
No employee should be punished for becoming a member of any unrecognised union or association, if its activities are not prejudicial to government servants conduct rules. The Government should set up an adequate and acceptable machinery for getting all disputes settled by amicable means and methods.
In the circumstances, if it is desired that government servants should give up strike as a weapon for getting their grievances redressed it is imperative that there should be adequate machinery for quick negotiations, readressal of grievances, and settlement of disputes.
There should further be provision for arbitration to which recourse can be had, should there be some difference on a question of remuneration or some other important service conditions such as leave and hours of work and these remain unresolved. It is only then that the government would be discharging the obligations towards its employees which they would be assuming by requiring them to give up the right to strike.
If it is in the public interest that public servant should not use a weapon, which is available to other employees, as an effective instrument for getting better service and working conditions, it is only just and fair that they should have an alternative arrangement for securing quick, reasonable and acceptable solution to their problems.
It has rather rightly been said that, “If strikes and demonstrations can be eliminated from the public service and a fair treatment can be ensured to public servants through orderly process, introduction of an adequate machinery for removal of grievances, including compulsory arbitration, would not be an unreasonable price to pay.”
In spite of the fact that the central government is discouraging strikes the employees still consider it as an effective instrument for getting their grievances redressed.
The governments is seriously considering of taking such measures which enable public servants to put forth their demands and reach a settlement with the government before a stage comes when employees adopt the last resort of going on strike and confronting their employers.
10. Essay on the Elite Character of Bureaucracy:
In India bureaucracy has maintained its elite character. Of course, during British days every care was taken to see that those who belonged to the high class families got top positions and jobs in the services. In those days few Indians were provided opportunities to occupy high jobs and by training they were not allowed to mix up with their subordinates.
They mixed among themselves and thus formed a class by themselves. Under the constitution of India all have been given equal opportunities to compete and there is no distinction while making recruitment to any post, either on the basis of caste, creed or property or sex.
Of course many belonging to middle and lower-middle classes have competed and are occupying top positions in bureaucracy, yet bureaucracy in India has not completely given up its elite character.
W.H. Morris Jones in his book, “Government and Politics in India” has mentioned that in a study of 350 persons who were appointed to top civil servants, over a period of few years, as many as 200 were sons of government officials and 100 came from professional families.
Out of these 350 persons as many as 100 were public school educated and had got this education in such schools either in India or abroad. As many as 85% of these persons came from the urban and 15% in the rural areas. UPSC also pointed out in its report that not even a single student qualified from 39 Universities, whereas bulk of the students came from 12 Universities, Delhi University being one such University.
Specialist Vs. Generalist Controversy:
In India so far it was believed and it is still believed that an IAS officer or a senior civil servant is competent enough to control every department and look after efficiently any work which is assigned to him. For this he does not need any special training. During British days senior civil service personnel, who used to be Britishers, manned all departments of Government of India and also controlled provincial administration.
This situation continued even after independence for quite some time. But as the time passed the specialists also began to raise their voice and started demanding their share in top administrative positions and posts.
There were several causes responsible for it. One such reason being that they were far more academically superior than the generalists and also they were more in contact with the masses than the generalists.
Second Pay Commission which examined the issue of demand of the specialists for more share in senior secretariat service recommended that the departments in which work is mainly of technical nature the secretary should have technical background along with administrative ability.
One of the Estimate Committees of Parliament which also looked into the demands of the specialists held the view that more specialists should be given higher administrative responsibilities. It was of the view that large number of officers with technical background and training should be picked up as administrative heads in departments, etc., which deal with scientific, industrial and technical subjects.
Administrative Reforms Commission (1966-70) also examined the issue. It was of the view that a functional field should be carved out for the I.A.S. The posts falling outside that should be filled by experienced personnel in one of the specialisation.
The areas of specialisation identified by the Commission included economic, industrial, agricultural, social, educational, personnel, financial, defence, etc., administration and planning.
The Government of India, however, held the view that there were practical difficulties in filling up posts in Ministries and departments dealing with technical subjects only with officers of respective technical services. The work in the secretariat is quite of different nature than what it is in the technical institutions.
But the specialists have quite successfully articulated their demands. It is desirable that the specialists who have established themselves as good administrators should be appoint in the secretariat on administrative jobs. It is in the interest of nation that both the generalists and the specials should consider themselves as complementary and not contradictory to each other.
11. Essay on the Criticism against Bureaucracy:
Bureaucracy has become powerful in every country and punch of its presence is felt by everyone in every walk of life. It is because its power and role has much increased.
Some of the main points of criticism advanced against bureaucracy in India are as under:
(1) There is lack of co-ordination both in work and decisions. It is because after partition of the country bureaucratic structure and strength of the bureaucracy has very much increased. But in order to keep it as a co-ordinated organisation no central coordinating body has been developed.
Same work is duplicated at various levels. In addition, there are conflicting decisions. Increased strength of civil servants was unavoidable and is understandable, but what is not understandable is lack of co-ordination and co-operation at every level.
(2) Then other criticism levied against bureaucracy is that in India it is inelastic. It has no human outlook. The laws are interpreted not taking human needs into considerations. The interpretation of rules is not with a view to benefiting the people. It is completely forgotten that the laws are meant for the welfare of the people and that these are simply means to an end.
(3) There it is too much of favouritism and nepotism in services. The decisions are taken not on merit but on the basis of personal contacts and relationship. In many cases favours are shown at the cost of the people who have no contacts with the high up bosses.
(4) It is also said against bureaucracy that civil servants are corrupt. They expect easy money for doing even some work which should ordinarily be done in the course of time. The files do not move from one table to the other without greasing the palm of the dealing hands. All favours are shown to the person who pays as against the one who is law abiding and opposed to the evil of corruption.
(5) Then it is said that bureaucracy takes too long a time to take a final decision. Each paper is to pass through several stages. At every stage unnecessary queries are raised and in many cases the purpose for which party approaches for getting the grievances redressed is defeated. It is thus said that day-by-day it is becoming inefficient and lowering its position in the eyes of the people.
(6) Bureaucracy is more interested in creating hurdles rather than removing these. Thus, the whole approach is how not to do a thing rather than how to do a thing and to help.
(7) It is also said about bureaucracy in India that it too much cares for its own interest. It is always agitating for increase in salaries and perks. It earns money through under-hand means. It is least concerned with the interests of tax payers. Thus, much less services are provided to the masses as compared with the taxes paid by them.
(8) Still another criticism levied is that the bureaucrats are engaged in their in fights. The aim of each one in the bureaucracy to have his strong empire and that each department wants to have maximum power and authority and in the process interests of the common-man are completely forgotten. As already said this has resulted in generalist vs. technocrat controversy.