Whispers Forum — 19 Oct 2020
DEBATE (1)
Now the debate. As it is there is enough rivalry among several services specially the IAS and others. Why add to this. Induction of these civil servants in the cabinet itself is rather unusual. The Prime minister would have found talent in them to assign their respective portfolios to them. Some portfolios like External Affairs and Civil aviation have more visibility than Power. The number of portfolios also matters. It also depends upon the individual. Aggressiveness does not necessarily mean good performance.
Aarti Khosla
Cutoff year for spineless bureaucrat
As reported in Whispers there is a consensus that the cutoff year was 1980. This happened because UPSC changed the exam patter starting with 1979 examination (called IAS etc. examination upto 1978 exam 1979 batch). A careful observer can sense the difference between pre-1980 batches and 1980 batch. The age limit was increased as also the number of attempts. The distinction between higher and lower subjects was abolished and proficiency in English was deemphasised. In the IFS it has posed a challenge for training: How to teach Spanish, German or French to the new recruits who are not good in English. In all services, it meant loss of idealism. Middle aged people with persistence to appear in the examination again and again started entering the civil services. UPSC became Union Public Surprise Commission. There are instances of inspectors who were caught taking bribes (but acquitted being given benefit of doubt) later got into IPS and class 1 central services. The new system was meant to counter elitism in civil services; which it may have done to some extent. But the idealism that one saw in young recruits (upto 1979 batch) has been lost. Many in the pre-1980 batches became spineless and corrupt mid-career. But 1980 batch onwards, many have such tendencies while in junior scale. Journalists including MJ Akbar after meeting officer trainees have reported that for some entrants to class 1 service prime reason was to make (illicit) money. Their choice of the civil service also depended on this factor. This was not the case earlier. There is a wide variation between individual officers; but we are talking about the averages and thereby the cutoff year is rightly assessed as 1980. There have been attempts to revert to the earlier system; but such proposals are either classified as elitist and rejected or get lost in committees.
Prof. N. C. Saxena
Now the debate. As it is there is enough rivalry among several services specially the IAS and others. Why add to this. Induction of these civil servants in the cabinet itself is rather unusual. The Prime minister would have found talent in them to assign their respective portfolios to them. Some portfolios like External Affairs and Civil aviation have more visibility than Power. The number of portfolios also matters. It also depends upon the individual. Aggressiveness does not necessarily mean good performance.
Aarti Khosla
Cutoff year for spineless bureaucrat
As reported in Whispers there is a consensus that the cutoff year was 1980. This happened because UPSC changed the exam patter starting with 1979 examination (called IAS etc. examination upto 1978 exam 1979 batch). A careful observer can sense the difference between pre-1980 batches and 1980 batch. The age limit was increased as also the number of attempts. The distinction between higher and lower subjects was abolished and proficiency in English was deemphasised. In the IFS it has posed a challenge for training: How to teach Spanish, German or French to the new recruits who are not good in English. In all services, it meant loss of idealism. Middle aged people with persistence to appear in the examination again and again started entering the civil services. UPSC became Union Public Surprise Commission. There are instances of inspectors who were caught taking bribes (but acquitted being given benefit of doubt) later got into IPS and class 1 central services. The new system was meant to counter elitism in civil services; which it may have done to some extent. But the idealism that one saw in young recruits (upto 1979 batch) has been lost. Many in the pre-1980 batches became spineless and corrupt mid-career. But 1980 batch onwards, many have such tendencies while in junior scale. Journalists including MJ Akbar after meeting officer trainees have reported that for some entrants to class 1 service prime reason was to make (illicit) money. Their choice of the civil service also depended on this factor. This was not the case earlier. There is a wide variation between individual officers; but we are talking about the averages and thereby the cutoff year is rightly assessed as 1980. There have been attempts to revert to the earlier system; but such proposals are either classified as elitist and rejected or get lost in committees.
Prof. N. C. Saxena