
‘Being a civil servant doesn't guarantee freedom from prejudices associated with visual impairment': Commissioner (Municipality), Mahe
When India celebrates and idealises civil servants who become social media sensations the moment they clear the UPSC Civil Services Examination, there are a few for whom success doesn't end the struggle. Satender Singh, who lost his eyesight when he was just a little over one, is one of them.
Having cracked the UPSC Civil Services Exam four times, most recently in 2024, Singh currently serves as the Commissioner of Mahe Municipality in Puducherry. But behind this success and title lies a deeper story of daily biases and prejudices that have not disappeared, even with a government ID.
Born in a farmer's family in Amroha, Uttar Pradesh, Singh was the first in his family to go to school. After attending school for blind boys in Delhi 's Kingsway Camp, Singh went to Delhi University's St Stephen's College, and then to Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU). Later, Singh's interest in teaching also led him to teach political science at Sri Aurobindo College (Evening) of the University of Delhi, before qualifying for the civil services.
We need a more inclusive bureaucracy.
In this exclusive interview for Expert Talk of The Indian Express UPSC Essentials, Satender Singh talks about the hardships he faced growing up visually impaired in a marginalised community, and the systemic prejudices he continues to confront even as a serving civil servant.
Satender Singh: During childhood, I was given the wrong injection that left me visually impaired. The struggles began soon after. The first challenge I remember was that of invisibilisation. I recall being kept behind closed doors during joyful occasions and social gatherings like marriage ceremonies.
In our society, disability is often linked to past-life karma, and such prejudices result in insults, humiliation, and disgrace. From an early age, I became an object of taunts and ridicule — something that continued even into adulthood.
Access to schooling wasn't easy. Local teachers treated me like a bad omen. They outright denied me the right to study. In one painful memory, the headmaster refused entry, and sent me away from the school gates. I felt as if I were not a human. It was a harsh beginning, but also the start of a journey defined by resilience.
There were also specific struggles against what I call the prejudices of ableism. In the rural area of Amroha, where I grew up, the loss of vision led people to believe I had magical powers. Some thought I was destined to become a katha vachak (religious storyteller).
Manas: When you moved from a rural area to an urban setting, how did the nature of the prejudices and challenges you faced change?
Satender Singh: In urban elite circles, different kinds of prejudices and humiliation still exist. To give an example, I recall the controversy last year involving an IAS officer who allegedly submitted a fake Persons with Disability certificate. What shocked me was how some very senior bureaucrats and people in high positions in this country began questioning the reservation policy for disabled candidates, even doubting their competence for administrative roles. I found this deeply disturbing.
Clearing the examination again has become one of my motivations — to prove myself. They call it the toughest exam, and I have cleared it four times. There have been disabled civil servants who have performed better than their non-disabled counterparts. Yet, if such prejudices and stereotypes continue to persist in society — especially within elite circles — it reveals how the everyday struggle doesn't end, even for those who have cleared the civil services and served in high positions.
One important point I want to highlight is the absence of vacancies for visually impaired candidates in the Indian Foreign Service (IFS) under the UPSC Civil Services Examination 2024. Do they want to tell us that visually impaired individuals are unfit to serve as diplomats? If it is so, that is yet another example of bias. If visually impaired officers can serve effectively as district collectors, why not as diplomats?
The last visually impaired candidate to join the IFS was in 2015, and none have been selected since. If someone has a strong grasp of foreign policy and international relations, why should disability be a disqualifier? I strongly urge that the IFS be made accessible to visually impaired candidates.
I think it should be a matter of pride for the country to show inclusivity and sensitivity at the highest level in services like the Indian Foreign Service. We need more inclusive bureaucracy.
Manas: Do these prejudices still exist for you, even after becoming a civil servant?
Satender Singh: At present, I have greater access to resources, influence, and awareness to help improve conditions. But these are not battles that can be won once and for all.
Being a civil servant does not guarantee freedom from the prejudices and struggles associated with visual impairment. It's not like poverty — once you climb the ladder, you might escape it. My struggle is constant — every day, every hour, every minute. I must continually prove myself and my credentials.
So no, the struggles haven't gone away. But I see equalisation of capabilities as a long-term solution that can bring a change.
Satender Singh: To be honest, the civil services were not my first choice. I was more inclined toward academics. However, due to issues like increasing ad hocism in academia these days, I was drawn toward the more secure career path offered by UPSC. One of the major reasons for choosing civil services, though, was that this field allows marginalised candidates to rise to the top and claim the equality, justice, and respect that are often lacking in academic spaces.
Manas: But now, when you go back to your village, where all these discriminations started, are you seen as a role model?
Satender Singh: One doesn't become a role model overnight. First, they dislike you, then you succeed, and they don't want to believe you; they are in denial. With time, they gradually accept. But the process is really slow.
It is like when the steam engine was first invented, the onlookers first said it wouldn't start. Once it started, they said it wouldn't stop. Prejudices continue to exist, they are long-lived, and do not die.
Manas: What message do you have for visually impaired candidates and all those who face struggles in the civil services?
Satender Singh: Visual impairment, or any kind of disability, should not be seen as a marker of incompetence for any service. Visually impaired individuals can be just as efficient and capable as diplomats. One message I definitely want to share with all those who aspire to or clear the civil services is this: remember that a career, including civil services, is just a small part of life. Enjoy life as it comes.
When I think about struggles, I'm reminded of a poem by Jagdish Gupt.
Apne hriday ka satya apne aap humko khojna
Apne nayan ka neer apne aap humko ponchhna
Aakaash sukh dega nahin
Dharti paseeji hai kahin
Har ek raahi ko bhatak kar hi disha milti rahi
Sach hum nahin, sach tum nahin.
'Remember that a career, including civil services, is just a small part of life. Enjoy life as it comes,' says Singh.
(We must search for the truth of our own hearts ourselves
We must wipe the tears from our own eyes ourselves
The sky does not offer joy,
Nor has the earth ever truly softened
It is only after losing the way
That a traveller finds direction.
Truth is neither you nor I alone.)
For your queries and suggestions write at manas.srivastava @ indianexpress.com
Hashtags

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


The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
Indian-origin Singaporean blogger fined for posting racial remarks on TikTok
An Indian-origin blogger in Singapore was fined SGD 6,000 (about ₹4 lakh) on Friday (June 6, 2025) after he pleaded guilty to one charge of knowingly committing an act which promoted disharmony between different racial groups in the country through a post on TikTok. Manmeet Singh's post came after he received a link from an unknown person with the alleged offensive content, Channel News Asia reported. Mr. Singh (57), then posted a commentary about the content without verifying its authenticity. In the commentary on TikTok, Mr. Singh claimed that Minister for Digital Development and Information Josephine Teo had made offensive remarks against Malays, a mostly Muslim community which accounts for about 15% of Singapore's six million-plus population. He removed it once he realised that he had been "led on" by the unknown person, his lawyers told the court. Mr. Singh is a blogger who posts about socio-political issues on TikTok, among other social media platforms. He posted the offending content on TikTok on August 12, 2024. The blog post alleged that Ms. Teo, when asked about racial progress during an interview with Chinese media on Singapore's 59-year development, had made an offensive remark against Malays last year. Ms. Teo is of Chinese descent. At the time of the offences, Mr. Singh's TikTok account had around 9,054 followers. The video prompted Mr. Teo's colleagues and a reporter to ask the Minister about it. Around four hours after the video was published, Ms. Teo told her Press Secretary about it. The Press Secretary then downloaded a copy of the video and lodged a police report. Later that day, Mr. Singh suspected the allegations were false and removed the TikTok video. He then posted another video in which he apologised to Ms. Teo, noting that his previous allegation was probably false. Mr. Singh was arrested on February 4, 2025, and released on bail the next day. The defence lawyers said that Singh was "racked with guilt" over his actions. "Manmeet is not in the business of making his videos for profit or clout. His content is akin to an extension of himself and his views, which he shares because he feels responsible for raising awareness," said the lawyers. Mr. Singh has since "deliberately steered clear of associating with other politicians to avoid controversy", the lawyers said. He also actively vets his news sources. For promoting racial disharmony, Mr. Singh could have been jailed for up to three years, fined, or both.


India Gazette
3 hours ago
- India Gazette
"Karnataka govt just trying to make the police a scapegoat": BJP' RP Singh
New Delhi [India], June 6 (ANI): Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) national spokesperson RP Singh on Friday alleged that the Congress-led Karnataka government was trying to make the police in the RCB stampede incident. 'Karnataka government is just trying to make the Karnataka Police a scapegoat.... they are trying to put their blame on the police,' Singh told ANI. He further stated that the celebrations for the win of the RCB team were supposed to be held on Sunday but were adanced by the government, which resulted in the death of the people. 'The reality is that the celebrations were supposed to be held on Sunday, but the government, in excitement, preponed it, which led to the death of the people...' he added. BJP spokesperson Shehzad Poonawalla alleged that the Bengaluru stampede was a state-sponsored man-made disaster and further held the Chief Minister and Deputy Chief Minister to be directly responsible for the tragic incident. 'What we have seen in the Bengaluru stampede is nothing short of a state-sponsored man-made disaster for which the CM and Deputy CM are directly responsible. They are A1 and A2, but instead of taking accountability, we see that they constantly attempt to shift the blame. DK Shivakumar, just 24 hours ago, was saying that the Police have done a fantastic job, they have done an excellent job. He was blaming the crowd,' Poonawalla told ANI. Meanwhile, Congress MP Pramod Tiwari backed the Karnataka government and congratulated them for taking possible steps and suspending the Commissioner of the Bengaluru City Police. 'I congratulate the Karnataka government for taking every possible step and suspending even the Commissioner...'Tiwari compared RCB to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and lashed out at the opposition, stating that they had not been able to locate or punish the culprits of the Pahalgam attack.' The compensation RCB gave is too little. Like I said, at least one crore each should be given to the families of the deceased... They are an example for the BJP. To date, the BJP has not been able to locate or punish the culprits of the Pahalgam attack,' he added. On June 4, eleven people died and more than 30 were injured in a stampede outside Bengaluru's M Chinnaswamy stadium as a huge crowd of nearly three lakh people had gathered to witness the victory celebration of Royal Challengers Bengaluru which won the Indian Premier League (IPL). (ANI)


Hindustan Times
7 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Terms of Trade: Are universities as radical as they were 50 years ago?
This column was written on a day which marks 50 years of Jaiprakash Narayan's call for Sampoorn Kranti (total revolution) in Patna (June 5). While JP's clarion call in 1975 was targeted at politics at large, students played a big role in the agitation which would eventually force Indira Gandhi to declare the Emergency. The JP movement prepared ground for the Congress losing power in India two years later and changed Indian politics forever. The student leaders who led the agitation in Bihar, and in many other parts of the country, went on to become successful and important politicians in India. 2025 marks 50 years of the Emergency and there is bound to be a lot of writing on the event and its implications for India. Among the best things to read is Srinath's Raghavan's latest book, Indira Gandhi and Years that Transformed India, which this columnist hopes to write about in detail very soon. This week's edition of the column is not about the Emergency. But it is on a related subject in more contemporary times. Are universities as important centres of political rebellion as they were 50 years ago in India? To be sure, political activism and agitations in universities are not just an India specific phenomenon. Europe saw a wave of such agitations during the anti-fascist and pro-communist phase in the 1930-40s and both the US and Europe during the anti-war protests in the 1960s and 70s. A cursory look suggests universities continue to remain epicentres of agitations and are therefore also attracting the ire of the powers that be. In India, the arc of university-based agitations seems to have traversed from the left leaning protestor-par-excellence Jawaharlal Nehru University to the privately owned Ashoka University. The latter has been built by a joint corpus contributed by some of India's most successful post-reform capitalists. In the US, it is none other than Harvard, the crème de la crème of Ivy Leagues, which is fighting what can be described as an existential battle with the Trump administration. Trump's latest attack has been to suspend Harvard from the international student visa programme which, unless reversed, will deal a crippling blow to its finances as well as academic excellence. This is not just about a handful of institutions. There are students and faculty members across universities who are putting a lot of things, including their professional careers, at stake for defending the values they hold dear; be it the cause of Palestine in American campuses or secularism and nuanced debates around it in India. These stylised facts will tempt many to say that music in the cafes and revolution in the air prognosis still holds for educational campuses in the world. This column, in keeping with its circumspect tradition, would like to argue that there is merit in taking a more critical look at the unambiguous celebration of radicalism in university campuses. Such a view is required not because one has to necessarily agree or disagree with the causes being espoused by the agitating students and faculty. The bigger reason why this argument needs engagement is because the criticality emerging out of universities has suffered a rupture with larger political-economy outside these campuses, both in the advanced world as well as countries such as India. The reasons for this rupture is that universities and their protestors have failed to come to terms with the political implications of the economic developments in the last 50 years. The divergence is easier to explain in the US. One of the biggest differences between Trump's and his opponents' political bases in the last three presidential elections has been the gap between voters who went to college and who did not. An opinion page piece in the Wall Street Journal on June 3 says that 'the Republican Party had increased its vote share in three consecutive presidential elections in 1,433 counties, nearly half the national total' and 'in not a single county in which the Republican Party increased its share of the vote did a majority of adults hold a college degree.' This is in keeping with Trump's 'I love the poorly educated' retort to Hillary Clinton's suicidal jibe against him in the 2016 elections. Why the poorly educated loved Trump back should not be rocket science to anyone who has basic intelligence. As the world embraced globalization, more and more blue-collared jobs moved out of the US to countries such as Japan, South-East Asia and eventually China even as highly educated workers, American or foreign born, amassed large fortunes in the knowledge economy dominated by things such as finance and technology and the ecosystems they created or supported. The neoliberal order in America, which had bipartisan support until Trump arrived on the scene, consistently tilted the balance of power and prosperity in an unprecedented manner against the non-educated and in favour of those who went to elite universities. Most of the Ivy-Leaguers did nothing to protest against this growing divide. As Trump trains his guns on the elite universities, he does not have to worry about a political blowback from their stakeholders. They were never with him to begin with and Trump's actual voters see the highly educated as having been oblivious to their increasing predicament. That knowledge creation might become a collateral damage in this process is just an incidental outcome in Trump's scheme of things. In India the biggest intellectual political indictment of the student movement came at the turn of the 1990s when the Mandal-Kamandal binary erupted. India's upper-caste dominated higher education saw a large (even if reactionary) rebellion against the imposition of Mandal Commission recommendations which brought in reservations for the Other Backward Classes in education and government jobs for the first time. The political constituency for Mandal was much bigger than the opposition to it in the universities and it has never looked back in its struggle for expanding the realm of affirmative action since then. The announcement of a caste census and (the likely-to-follow) expansion of the OBC quota is yet another advance in this long march. Indian universities today are far more socially representative than they used to be in the 1990s. However, this progressive turn of events has been eclipsed by a right-wing tilt in Indian polity, namely, the rise of Hindutva which started from the Ram Temple movement in the late 1980s. While the high priests of Indian academia, especially its progressive spectrum, lost the chance to be vanguardist on the question of social justice to those outside their sanitised boundaries, they went horribly wrong in claiming vanguardism in the fight against communalism. This crisis and mistake were the most prominent in the initiative by historians of the Jawaharlal Nehru University who tried to counter the Ram Temple movement and the BJP by making it a debate on historiography, which is something this column has written about earlier as well. Despite the best efforts of many political commentators to portray the Mandal and Kamandal projects as fundamentally antithetical, there is clear evidence to argue that the two have been talking to each other in the last three and a half decades and been able to find common ground. It is this mismatch between theory and practice which has led to an absence of large student agitations – there have been flash points for sure – against the current regime. The entrenched organisations would like to marry caste and communalism but the former's larger constituency is more interested in advancing its own agenda and settling some intra-group scores than fighting a pitched battle against Hindutva. To be sure, the fall in militancy of the student movement in India is not just a result of a muddled discourse on caste versus communalism. It is as much a function of class. When students rebelled en masse during the Emergency, attending public universities in the hope of landing a plain vanilla government job was pretty much the only game in town for Indians in higher education. Economic reforms changed all this as millions of students started going to private vocational educational institutions. While the education or training was not necessarily great here, these places worked wonders for young graduates who happened to be in the right place at the right time. Challenges presented by a rise in economic inequality and a failure to achieve a larger economic transformation notwithstanding, India's higher education became extremely promising even if expensive for a vast majority of young students who did not necessarily come from privileged backgrounds. Radicalism was the last thing on their minds when the world was awash with private sector jobs. This is also why India could never really develop an anti-neoliberal movement among its educated even though there has been a consistent pushback from the really poor in terms of demands to expand the welfare net. While it is early days, there are signs that the global economic turbulence, rising protectionism in the advanced world and rise of things such as AI will land a big blow to the buy-a-degree-and-get-employed model of education in India. What will perhaps make this crisis worse is the fact that today's youth have aspirations which go beyond the basic roti-kapda-makan for the youth of the 1970s. This mismatch between aspirations and reality likely transcends ideological boundaries on things such as religion and caste. While more and more politicians are pretending to cater to these growing anxieties by talking about things such as more government jobs and possibility of reservations (not necessarily caste based) in the private sector, young people know that they are hardly a call to change the system or overhaul it fundamentally. The periodic precipitations in universities, elite and non-elite, have so far failed to strike a chord with this latent anxiety which is building among India's youth. That universities are essential not just for making people employable but also the battleground of ideas is an argument one often hears while criticising regimes cracking down on academic institutions or protestors belonging to them. The moral imperative of such an argument must confront the reality that present day democracy works in the confines of capitalism which, if one were to paraphrase Marx's famous quote in The Communist Manifesto, is committed to making ideas of the ruling ideas of any age the ideas of the ruling class. Does this mean the idealism around student movements is misplaced? A lesser-known quote from Marx can answer this question. 'The weapon of criticism cannot, of course, replace criticism of the weapon, material force must be overthrown by material force; but theory also becomes a material force as soon as it has gripped the masses. Theory is capable of gripping the masses as soon as it demonstrates ad hominem, and it demonstrates ad hominem as soon as it becomes radical. To be radical is to grasp the root of the matter', he writes in the introduction to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right. 50 years after India's students led an agitation and braved far more severe repressions than what is happening today to overthrow the strongest party in the country from power, it is worth asking whether today's student movements, both in India and abroad, and their advocates, are being able to grasp the 'root of the matter' or falling victim to Marx famous warning against philosophers, who are always only interpreting the world rather than changing it. Roshan Kishore, HT's Data and Political Economy Editor, writes a weekly column on the state of the country's economy and its political fall out, and vice-versa. Get 360° coverage—from daily headlines to 100 year archives.