All India Services and the Northeast

All India Services and the Northeast

JP Rajkhowa

A fter India attained independence, it was debated whether the British legacy of running the affairs of the States, that was primarily vested in the Indian Civil Service (ICS) and the Indian Police (IP), should be continued in some form in order to maintain continuity in administration and law-and-order management. It was at the insistence of the first Union Home Minister, Sardar Vallabhai Patel, who strongly argued in favour of creating a replica of ICS and IP for meeting the new challenges with efficiency and to strengthen national integration and unity of the country, that the first two All India Services (AIS) — IAS and IPS — were created, under the All India Services Act passed by Parliament. It is interesting that the ICS, also known as the Imperial Civil Service or the Steel Frame, and its supporting service, the Imperial Police, which contributed significantly in carrying forward the imperialistic agenda of the British Raj as absolutely loyal and disciplined servants of the Crown, fascinated the great Indian freedom fighters, who opted for their replica in the form of IAS and IPS in a different political set-up. During the Raj, the ICS and IP were in fact functioning as All India Services, as the officers of these two services were posted in different provinces and were also transferable from one province to another under the unitary Imperial Government of India. However, the picture totally changed in independent India, which was given a democratic federal structure — being a Union of States and Union Territories, with a specified list of functions and responsibilities for the Centre and the States.The inclusion of subjects ‘‘public order’’ and ‘‘police’’ in the State List made it mandatory that members of the IAS and IPS — though categorized as All India Services — would be allotted to specific States, against the State cadres created for these two services. There is, however, provision of deputation of these officers to the Central government under what is called ‘‘central deputation quota’’, which is also fixed in consultation with the respective States, but by and large it is a mere formality. Although the State government concerned is required to make recommendation by placing the services of willing or selected officers with the Central government, it is the latter which decides which officer is to be picked up, with the States having little control over any selection by the Centre. For posting of officers against vacancies in the posts of Joint Secretary (JS) and above, a procedure of empanelment has been prescribed, which is observed to be a totally non-transparent process, with the highest officialdom at the Centre headed by the Cabinet Secretary having the final say and with the approving authorities in the normal course being used as a mere rubber stamp. As a consequence of such practice, with no avenues for appeal against non-empanelment or any reason given for not empanelling an officer as JS or in higher posts, the practice of ‘‘greasing the palm’’ has become very popular with aspirants for prime posting at the Centre. In addition, ‘‘putting in a word’’ for particular candidates by important ministers or politicians of the ruling party carries significant weight in the ‘empanelment’. Thus it is observed that many shining and performing honest officers of some States are not empanelled, whereas even corrupt or tainted officers, with dubious past records in the allotted State(s), find their names prominently in the ‘empanelled list’, thereby causing frustration among the efficient and honest lot. Such favouritism at the cost of efficiency and integrity has resulted in the politicization of the IAS and IPS, which in turn has resulted in inefficiency, communalism and corruption.Meanwhile, another service called the Indian Forest Service (IFS) was added to the list of AIS, though there was no compelling ground as in the case of the IAS and IPS. The only rationale behind this new addition could be the Forest & Environment Protection Act and the Wild Life Preservation & Protection Act passed by Parliament, which warrant uniform standards for implementation and enforcement all over the country. The policy makers might have decided that creation of an IFS cadre on the lines of the IAS and IPS would serve national interests better than the State Forest Services which were so long looking after forests and wildlife. In reality, however, the overall scenario in these two key areas has not shown any visible improvement, with the forest coverage in most States coming down drastically, and poaching of wildlife has been on the rise with many extinct varieties disappearing from their traditional habitats. We have the classic example in Asom where rhino poaching and destruction of valuable forests have become the order of the day, in spite of the IFS officials at work. It has been observed over time that with deterioration in the value system and criminalization of Indian politics, the officers of the AIS have largely readjusted their style of functioning to the liking of their political masters, setting aside the rule of law which they are trained and expected to respect in public interest. With the advancement of the economy through industrial, business and commercial activities prompted by a huge push to science and technology in the recent decades, the nexus between bureaucrats and businessmen has developed on a solid footing. The expensive Indian election process, which keeps the door open for business funding of elections, has brought the business community closer to politicians, which has led to what one calls the ‘‘politician-businessman-bureaucrat’’ nexus. While the numerous Central services are not immune to such nexus, it has become more prominent in respect of the AIS officers who have to serve in the allotted States for most parts of their service career, subordinated to the whims of their political masters. In the States of the Northeast where insurgency/militancy/terrorism has been thriving in spite of the many peace overtures, public opinion — one of the cornerstones of democracy — has simply become irrelevant. As a result, with enormous legal powers in hand, the servants of the people have virtually become their masters, and the officialdom at their command has willy-nilly become their copycats. Since the imposition of Emergency in 1975, the healthy democratic traditions set by the leaders of the country in the initial years of the post-independence era were set at naught, and corruption at all levels — political, administrative and economic — raised its ugly head, thereby giving a jolt to the AIS concept, which became a part of the anti-people political set-up. While there are good exceptions at both the Centre and in the States, with uncompromising officers of the AIS purely dedicated to serve the law of the land and the public whose servants they really are, the change in societal attitude for material gains and pleasure have more or less eaten into the vitals of the AIS.In the northeastern States, apart from the greedy political class devouring huge chunks of developmental funds, unscrupulous members of the AIS are increasingly getting involved in all forms of corruption. While the adverse security environment due to militancy has been a cause of concern for IAS and IPS officers from outside the region during their posting here, and while a good number of such officers have lost their lives in extremist violence as pointed out by Dr PC Alexander (a former Cabinet Secretary and Governor) at the Centre, it is not correct to say ‘‘that this has made the members of the All India Services posted to these States the forgotten children of the family’’.Mr Alexander further observes: ‘‘Unfortunately, the fact that a large number of young officers belonging to the All India Services are not getting the opportunities for giving their best services to the country, but are instead living with a sense of frustration and anxiety for their own safety, is not adequately appreciated by the authorities, and therefore, this underutilization of their services continues as an avoidable feature of the civil service in the region.’’ In addition to the incentives already provided to the AIS officers from outside posted in the region, Dr Alexander has suggested a system of ‘‘twinning’’ of cadres for the IAS and IPS officers posted in the Northeast. This would mean that these officers will have the opportunities to serve in a larger and more developed State for a fairly long period during their career. The exposure they get from service in the larger and more advanced States will help them to enhance their usefulness when they work in the relatively backward northeastern States. Theoretically, this suggestion makes sense, as in that case assuming Asom is ‘‘twinned’’ with Maharashtra, Asom could benefit to a certain extent. But what about Maharashtra — a highly advanced State? Would an officer, after serving a long period in Karnataka, for instance, be mentally prepared and physically tuned to serve in the interiors of Arunachal Pradesh if this State be ‘‘twinned’’ with Karnataka? Why not go for special recruitment to the AIS from suitable candidates hailing from the States of the Northeast itself for posting in the region, which at any point of time has the smallest number of direct recruits?The Northeast needs AIS officers who have the will to serve the people and who have the guts to face all political odds. (The writer was an IAS officer and retired as Chief Secretary, Assam) source: sentinel assam editorial 29.06.08