UPSC cadre allocation proposal: Not a good idea, Prime Minister

The Union Public Service Commission is a very special institution. Established in 1926 with mere advisory function, it has evolved into a functionally autonomous constitutional body. The leaders of national movement played an important role in this evolution of UPSC. The leaders of our national movements knew fully well that their vision of a truly democratic and inclusive India can become a reality only with robust institutions.

Unfortunately, many people, either due to ignorance or by design fail to make the distinction between democracy and majoritarianism. Democracy is not merely about numbers, much more importantly it is about institutions and norms. In the vision of our founding fathers, not only the independent judiciary and non-political armed forces, but also the non-political civil-services were essential to the truly democratic India. The celebrated ‘idea of India’ is not merely a cultural one. In order to continue and prosper as a nation-state, India needs a set of norms of ethical behaviour along with institutions with assured functional autonomy and independence from political pressures.

One can well imagine the kind of ‘democracy’ we would have had in the absence of such institutions. As a matter of of fact, over the years since the adoption of constitution, there has been some corrosion in various institution, it is imperative to ensure the inbuilt checks and balances to arrest any further dilution of the institutions.

Article 320 of the constitution clearly entrusts the UPSC with the ‘duty’ to ‘conduct examinations for appointments to the services of the union’ besides other duties like advising the government on disciplinary actions against civil servants. So far allotment of cadre is concerned, it is a logical extension of the conduct of examinations.

Let us not forget that the UPSC has maintained a very high degree of integrity in all the examinations conducted by it. This is a remarkable feat given the power and prestige associated with services like IAS and IPS on one hand, and the ever increasing number of aspirants on the other. UPSC is amongst the institutions which commands respect even in these lean days of the credibility of institutions. There are of course cases of unsuccessful candidates, sometimes blaming the particular board for their failure, but overall integrity and impartiality of its system has never been doubted. That is why, the effect of UPSC merit-list on the cadre allocation has been welcome all around.

All this has to be kept in mind while reflecting on the proposed reduction of the UPSC ‘effect’ on cadre allocation. Even if we assume a kind of ‘ideological innocence’ in the proposal ( an assumption a bit difficult to hold), the proposal of giving weightage to the performance in foundation course in cadre allocation is problematic for purely logical reasons as well.

The UPSC merit list is made after a rigorous competition which is designed to ensure the maximum degree of confidentiality, impartiality and fair play. With the weightage of interview considerably reduced now a days, there is hardly any scope of any unwelcome ‘personal’ factor playing any role.

On the other hand, can you imagine an effective training or foundation course without a degree of personal rapport between the instructor and instructed? Moreover a training by nature is different from a competition, and we are talking here of a competition which ensures your place in the permanent power structure of India. If the performance in the training were to play a role in cadre allocation, one can imagine the role of ‘personal’ factor. What the movers of the proposal seem to have missed is that it will adversely effect not only the cadre allocation but also the training; as it will turn the natural rapport into a coveted commodity for every trainee.

If the proposal becomes a reality, ‘personal’ factor will be playing a role in a process i.e. cadre allocation, where it should not. And then, who knows when will it slip into ‘political’ and ‘right connection’ factor? On the other hand, the process of training wherein personal rapport between trainer and trainee; and felling of fellowship amongst the trainers is a must—will be expected to made unduly impersonal—that too without any guarantee of success.

In other words, the proposal to make cadre allocation dependent on the marks scored in the foundation course will do harm to impartiality of the process as well as to effectiveness of the training.

Thankfully, it is only a proposal as of now. Hopefully someone among those who matter will have the clarity to see the possible harm and say categorically, yet politely (as Sir Humphrey, the immortal archetype of a career bureaucrat would do)—not a good idea, Prime Minister.

Purushottam Agrawal is a former member of the Union Public Service Commission. He tweets at @puru_ag