
What are the challenges faced by the civil services?
What is merit versus spoils system?
The merit system entails appointments to government posts after a rigorous selection process by an independent authority. In India, this commenced in 1858 when the British introduced the Indian Civil Service to select officers for administering the country. After independence, it is the Union Public Service Commission which conducts such exams. The merit system is aimed at building career bureaucrats who are expected to function without any political leanings and provide independent advice to the incumbent political executive. The spoils system works on the adage 'to the victor belong the spoils.' It is a system where the incumbent political executive appoints its supporters to various posts in the government. It has its origins in the U.S., and continued until 1883 when it was replaced largely by the merit system.
What is the role of the civil services?
The civil services have contributed significantly in the administration of our democratic system. As mentioned by the Cabinet Secretary, they have been instrumental in the conduct of free and fair elections, and ensuring smooth transfer of power both at the Centre and States. There have been numerous instances when States have been placed under President's rule, with the civil services ensuring uninterrupted administration during such times.
On the development side, they are a repository of institutional knowledge. They provide advice to ruling governments in policy making and also implement the policies made by the political executive. The administrative tasks of public bureaucracy include executing and monitoring programmes, and laying down laws, rules and regulations. Civil servants have been the fulcrum around which governance activities like delivery of essential services, providing relief operations etc., have been carried out.
What ails the civil services?
But the civil services also suffer from significant challenges. First, neutrality as a trait is fast eroding among bureaucrats, resulting in political bias in discharge of critical functions. It is pertinent to note that both the cause and effect of this phenomenon is the increasing political interference in all aspects of bureaucracy including postings and transfers. Second, career bureaucrats who are generalists, may lack the expertise needed to address technical challenges. Third, there is also significant corruption at all levels of the bureaucracy that often goes unpunished.
What reforms are required?
Some of the measures that need to be taken are summarised here.
In a democracy, the mandate is with the elected government and it needs to be respected. However, the neutral bureaucracy needs to be insulated from undue political interference to uphold the rule of law and constitutional values. To maintain a harmonious balance between the political and permanent executive, the autonomy of career bureaucrats is essential. This includes reasonable independence with respect to postings, tenures and transfers. Also, there needs to be a shift in the focus of bureaucrats from 'procedure' to 'outcomes.' Monitoring at present in the government is primarily through the measurement of outlays and at best through outputs. There is a need to move towards measurement of 'outcomes.' This reform can be hastened by hiring domain experts as lateral entrants, especially at senior levels. These reforms would uphold the essential traits of an effective civil service.
Rangarajan. R is a former IAS officer and author of 'Courseware on Polity Simplified'. The views expressed are personal.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hindu
22 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Political row erupts in Kerala over Governor's directive to observe ‘Partition horror day'
The Kerala government and Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar are at daggers drawn all over again after the 'saffron flag-holding Bharat Mata' row, with Mr. Arlekar directing State-run universities to observe 'Partition horror day' on August 14. Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan termed the directive 'unconstitutional and unacceptable'. 'The Sangh Parivar, which had no role in the freedom movement and served the British Raj, is now seeking to undermine Independence Day by calling for the creation of a day to remember the horrors of Partition. They conveniently forget the fact that Partition and the riots thereafter were a fallout of the British 'divide and rule' policy. The Raj Bhavan's stance in line with the divisive political agenda of the Sangh Parivar is unconstitutional. Our universities will not be allowed to be used as platforms for implementing such an agenda,' Mr. Vijayan said in a statement. Raj Bhavan had instructed universities last week to organise seminars and commemorative events, including street plays and dramas, highlighting 'the trauma of India's Partition.' 'They (the universities) can prepare dramas on this, which can be done by going to people and showing how terrible Partition was,' the message said. The circular also directed Vice-Chancellors to submit action plans for the observance. The directive echoes Prime Minister Narendra Modi's call made four years ago to observe August 14 as 'Partition horrors remembrance day'. However, this marks the first time universities in Kerala have received formal instructions to mark the occasion. Notably, the move comes just months after a similar Raj Bhavan directive asking universities to observe the anniversary of the Emergency on June 25 as 'Constitution assassination day' drew sharp criticism from various quarters. Although the Vice-Chancellors have not commented on the issue, the directive has drawn sharp reactions from various quarters. General Education Minister V. Sivankutty accused the Governor of attempting to run a parallel administration. 'The Governor has no constitutional power to instruct institutions to observe specific days. This is a clear overreach aimed at overriding the elected government,' he said. Calling the move politically motivated, Mr. Sivankutty questioned the intent behind the observance. 'Which Partition is he referring to? The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), which had no role in the freedom struggle, has worked to divide society. The Governor appears to be echoing this ideology,' he alleged. Leader of the Opposition V.D. Satheesan also criticised the Governor's actions, calling them 'unconstitutional.' 'By doing so, the Governor is acting less like a constitutional head and more like a spokesperson for the divisive politics of the RSS. The Chief Minister must not remain silent on the Governor's wayward actions. The government should officially register its protest,' Mr. Satheesan said. Communist Party of India (CPI) State secretary Binoy Viswam described the Governor's directive as 'anti-national', intended to 'cover up their [the Sangh Parivar's] sorrow over the collapse of British imperialism.'


News18
an hour ago
- News18
Delhi LG lays foundation stone of clock tower on Shankar Road
New Delhi, Aug 11 (PTI) Lieutenant Governor V K Saxena on Monday laid the foundation stone of a 'historic" clock tower on central Delhi's Shankar Road. The tower will be constructed by the New Delhi Municipal Council at the junction of Shankar Road and Mandir Marg (near Talkatora Stadium). In June, NDMC vice-chairman Kuljeet Singh Chahal said the project, approved by the Delhi Urban Art Commission (DUAC), will cost around Rs 1.3 crore and be built by December. 'It will be 27 metres in height. Many a time, it was thought where to build the clock tower. Many sights were seen, but nothing was finalised. People will soon get to see an incredible clock tower. It will also be earthquake-proof," Saxena said. The clock tower will have Arabic, British, and Hindu architecture, he added. view comments First Published: August 11, 2025, 21:00 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.


Hans India
2 hours ago
- Hans India
Akhilesh Yadav slams BJP after Hindu groups vandalise centuries-old tomb in UP's Fatehpur
Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav has sharply criticised the BJP following fresh tensions in Fatehpur, Uttar Pradesh, where Hindu groups vandalised a tomb, claiming it was originally a temple. In a statement, Yadav accused the BJP of pursuing divisive politics, saying, 'Only when society is divided and hatred is spread will the BJP be successful in politics. These people are following an ideology created by the British.' The incident took place at the centuries-old tomb of Nawab Abu Samad. On Monday, a group of Hindu activists staged a protest outside the structure, alleging that it was built after demolishing a Hindu temple. They reportedly sought permission from the district administration to conduct prayers at the site. Video clips circulating on social media show members of Hindu organisations vandalising parts of the mausoleum and hoisting saffron flags on it. The visuals have sparked outrage among the local Muslim community and political opposition. Following the unrest, police deployed tight security around the site to prevent further escalation. The administration is said to be investigating the matter, though tensions remain high. Yadav also pointed out that Fatehpur has witnessed similar communal incidents in the past, recalling that a mosque in the district was earlier demolished for being 'illegal' on the grounds that its construction map had not been approved. He added that in a separate earlier incident, a youth was killed, and action was taken only after considerable public and political pressure. Minister Kapil Dev stated that the Uttar Pradesh administration is fulfilling its responsibilities and emphasised that no individual will be permitted to take the law into their own hands. Minister Nand Kishor Gurjar commented on the controversy surrounding the site, asserting that there was no tomb originally present there. He claimed that the structures were built after the 17th century and linked their existence to the historical persecution of Hindus and the destruction of temples. He acknowledged that the recent vandalism was a reaction to that history, saying, 'Ideally, such actions should have been carried out through proper administrative channels. While those involved were not bad people, the act should have been conducted within the framework of the law.'