[02/05/25 23:37] Diksha: Civil Service Values and Neutrality

Bhure Lal*

Civil servants render service to governments of various political hues with equal dedication and
efficiency. They may disagree strongly with the government's policy but should not let this affect
their behaviour. The Westminster system has framed certain conventions for maintaining
neu-trality of civil servants, such as anonymity, loyalty, permanence, restricted political rights of
public servants, secrecy and ministerial responsibility. Parliament is supreme and must control
all branches of administra-tion. Ministers are part of administration and must be accountable to
Parliament; civil servants are their subordinates. In the words of Clark, 'If Minister is put
responsible for what happens then neither the opinion nor the actions nor words of civil
servants, who are not responsible, must embarrass him or force his decisions' (Elliott and
Thomas, 2011).

An enlightened civil service signifies the values of integrity, impartial-ity and merits, and provides
the framework for efficient administration ensuring good governance. The civil servants should
be service-oriented and citizen centric. They need to be insulated against undue political
interference. There is a need to constantly improve the skills of the civil servants so that they
can grapple with the explosion of knowledge and mange the dynamic changes effectively.Public
Service Values

The Constitution lays down certain values and protects the civil servant who sincerely follows
the rules and traditions of the system. However. the system is so complex and restrictive today
that it easily serves the goals of corrupt. The weakness of the system provides opportunities to
the corrupt in amassing huge wealth. The lack of protection to honest officers and values is
another area which discourages them to stand and fight corruption. If officers follow their
superiors blindly there is bound to be bad governance and integrity of the government system
might collapse. Therefore, there is need to devise a system which provides firm protection to
whistle-blowers so that they may not be victimised. This will introduce transparency in the
system and will discourage the cor-rupt superiors. Bureaucracy must play an instrumental role
rather than become a rent-seeking institution. Politicians must also be subjected to
accountability, this will ensure that illegal and inappropriate interferences are not done. Based
on empirical findings the following values can be enumerated:

1. Allegiance to Constitution and law

2. Function to serve as instruments of good governance

3. Political neutrality

4. Objectivity, honesty, integrity, courtesy and responsiveness

5. Uphold highest ethical standards and establish high standards of quality in services
6. Merit in employment, promotion and placements

7. Prudent use of public money

8. Accountability in decision making

9. The officials must not promote their own interest by misusing power and authority

10. Government to notify Code of Ethics to keep morale of the employees high

11. Code of Ethics to ensure compliance of public service values

12. Breach of the code will be punishable under law

13. Directions in violation of values to be invalidManagement code is developed by the

government after consultations with stakeholders and is based on the following principles:

1. Public service as a highly professional, merit-based institution for promoting good governance

2. Mechanisms and incentives to maintain high levels of productiv-ity, efficiency and excellence

3. Policies and structures for ensuring viability and sustainability of public services

4. Establishing interface between political executive and public servants

5. Government to ensure implementation of code within 12 months and submit annual report to
Parliament on compliance of code

6. Setting up of separate tribunals for dowry and property cases as they have a great scope for
illegal gratification, and revenue/police officials involve themselves in such cases neglecting
their normal duties and in the process raising the level of graft in the civil services

7. Information on all cases of procurement of stores and award of tenders beyond a particular
ceiling should be put on the public domain automatically

8. People with criminal records should not be allowed to contest election and the elections must
be funded through a bank account and any expenditure not booked to this account should be
treated as unauthorised expenditure and, hence, a corrupt practice.

Civil Service Neutrality

The neutrality principle may be equated with silence, and works largely to protect ministers
against public expression of views contrary to their own by people whose views they cannot
dismiss on the grounds of ignorance. The doctrine is that civil servants must not express their
own philosophy on any issue of public importance. He is to analyse the issue in a neutral and an
impartial manner. This applies not only to activeparty politics but also includes controversial
policy issues. According to the traditions of the British Constitution, a civil servant is a faceless
entity operating through official rules. Nevertheless, he is an important part of the administrative
culture. The principle of neutrality implies this sort of facelessness; otherwise civil servants
would not command the confidence and trust of successive governments. Some civil servants
are bound to have private views different from their minister's views and expression of these
views by the civil servants in public would jeopardise and destabilise the position of the minister.
The civil servants would acquaint themselves well by presenting the ministers with various pos
sible solutions to a policy issue and leaving it to the minister to make the choice in the light of
the political programme of the party. Thus the civil servant would provide non-partisan expert
advice on controversial issues upholding the principle of professional neutrality. The top civil
servants are the close collaborators of the ministers and advise them about the likely fallout and
consequences of their policy. Elsewhere, political neutrality is thought to mean taking no side on
political issues and render advice to the political boss in an objective manner. In some countries
ministers may appoint politically or personally sympathetic officials to key posts. In India, there
are no such designated posts. Appointments should be made on the basis of professional
competence alone and once appointed a civil servant should not be removed on political
grounds. He should serve successive governments with equal commitment and dedication. The
guiding principle of service in this regard is that a civil servant must serve, whatever master
comes along, with equal loyalty.

The doctrine of administrative neutrality has restricted public employ-ees participating in political
activities. The Hatch Acts framed during 1930s put barriers on political activities by government
workers with a view to establish a National Political Machine. Despite their popularity, a national
controversy has surrounded these Acts since the beginning. The protagonists considered the
Hatch Acts necessary for an efficient. professional and non-partisan public service enjoying
wide spread public confidence. The opponents asserted that Hatch Acts restricted the freedom
unconstitutionally, created job dissatisfaction leading to moral problems for government
servants.

The civil servants retain their position regardless of the Civil Service Neutrality and Civil Service
Values and the fortunes of politiciansThe politicians may create situations in which the civil
service may demand some form of political rights to organise, defend and vindicate it. In the
words of political scientist Frederic C. Mosher (1982)¹ the modern state is 'the provisional state
in which the policy formulation and particularly policy implementation, calls for highly specialized
knowledge and sophisticated administration. No political leadership can govern without a great
deal of technical and managerial assistance. The civil service provides this expertise. Disputes
between hungry poli-ticians and civil servants cannot be ruled out and one of them, mostly the
civil servant, is made a scapegoat. The possibility of there being a wide gap in the perception of
a political party and the civil servants on national issues cannot be ruled out. This gap takes a
critical turn when the former comes to power. The relationship changes because of pro-tocol
and powers of the ministers. Politicians, particularly the younger generation, view the civil
service with scant respect. They have little faith in the civil service and regard bureaucrats as
impediments in achieving their objectives. Every change in the political set-up necessitates a
change in the administrative structure. Under such circumstances some officers succumb to
pressure or patronage creating a crack in service morale and make the politician's job easy. The
senior becomes scared to stand up for harassed, honest and independent officers. The feeling
of esprit de corps is adversely affected among the rank and file of the civil service. The sense of
professional awareness and oneness goes for a toss. Some officers acquire a servile attitude
and believe in carrying out the legal as well as the illegal orders of their political masters. The
primary objective of such officers is to provide cover to illegal activities of their political bosses
and friends in industry and trade. They become instruments of misuse of power. The code of
conduct and constitutional obligations are thrown to winds. Civil servants act as active
politicians and they do not hesitate if their names are associated with organisations which
perpetu-ate casteism and communalism; rather they regard such an association to be the
stepping stone in the direction of promotions to reach the top. Such civil servants can never
remain neutral in an emergency. The official machinery becomes incapable to accept the
challenge created by political, communal and caste groups. It will be the most unfortunate day
for all of us when private armies will collect protection money from innocent people and the writ
of mafia-politician alliance will be aided
[02/05/25 23:38] Diksha: and abetted by administration. The civil service must effectively
counter the nefarious design of mafia dons enjoying political patronage. The job of civil servants
is very difficult under the present circumstances. The problem is not whether the civil service
can meet the challenge or not but whether correct instructions are being issued to civil servants
or not. The protectors of law must not themselves become breakers of law. If the civil service is
to retain whatever credibility it has, it must not allow itself to be politicised because a politicised
civil service is the greatest danger to a parliamentary democracy.

The ex-chief election commissioner, T.N. Seshan, while lambasting the country's bureaucracy,
said most bureaucrats are 'morally corrupt since they did not stand up against politicians and
ministers (Lal, 2009). Apart from financial dishonesty the intellectual dishonesty is widespread
among bureaucrats.

Civil servants carry out good deal of exercise to ascertain the views of their ministers before
recording any note and the note is always tailored to meet the requirements of the political boss
even if it is against rationality. justice and the interest of the country. "When the political boss
sneezes the civil servants catch cold. Without going into merits and demerits of what Seshan
said, it is time for civil servants to introspect and confront their weaknesses. Under the prevailing
circumstances, it will be difficult to credit the civil service with neutrality and integrity.
Incompetent and corrupt officers have been favoured by the central and the state govern-ments
for their partisan role in the discharge of their duties. The civil servants are swayed by avarice,
tempted by plum postings and lucrative desks in return for the services rendered to the political
bosses. Merit, intelligence and competence are discounted and an independent minded civil
servant takes the back seat.
Civil servants became agents to carry out all illegal and unconstitutional orders during the Indian
Emergency. The press was gagged and people were detained illegally. Arbitrary actions were
carried out with impunity. Most of the officers were acting for self-aggrandisement. 'If the officers
act at the instance of politicians to foster their political interest then the national interest is
thrown to winds', observes Justice Shah in the Shah Commission Report Vol. II (Lal, 2009).
Officers acting in collusion with politicians to carry out their evil designs are a greater danger to
thedemocracy than the politicians because the politicians have to face the electorate but not the
officers.

A civil servant will cease to be neutral if he plays party politics or imposes his own policies on
the country. A civil servant will also not be neutral if he uses the patronage of politicians to boost
his own career prospects. The civil servants are found not only paying obeisance to the
politicians but also to the businessmen and industrialists to secure postretirement prospects.

During imposition of the President's Rule, bureaucrats are used as puppets by politicians to
achieve by proxy what they had been denied by ballot. The rejected politicians are appointed in
large numbers to occupy the posts of chairman of cooperative societies, State Public
Enterprises, Mandi Parishads, Sahitya Academy and so on. The bureaucrats comply with the
orders in anticipation of favours at the hands of politicians once popular government is installed.

Interference by the politicians can be checked if the civil servants exhibit a little courage to stand
up to defend what is just and right. If the civil servants muster courage to tell the politicians
about their unconsti-tutional designs, the politicians would develop cold feet and dare not ask
them for wrong favours. The performance of civil administration depends on the quality and
character of the political executive. The errant officials must be punished and the innocent
should not be made scapegoats for the sins of their political masters.

Nothing should be done to demoralise the service as a demoralised bureaucracy may prove to
be the last straw on the back of the tired camel.

The essence of a true government is the people-oriented administration having public welfare at
heart. Public must be treated as subject of a democratic state. Their grievances should attract
prompt attention and remedial measures must be initiated ensuring no harassment to innocent
people. It is an unfortunate situation in which people feel that dealing with government
departments is a great curse. Administration must be responsive to the needs of the people
forging good will and harmony. A procedure-oriented bureaucracy will fail to deliver goods in
independent India as it cripples the initiative of people. Bureaucracy must be free from blemish
of inertia, ineffectiveness, red-tapism, bribery and self-defeating controls. Only then it can win
the admiration of the people.The ICS of the British days was one of the finest services in the
world. It was the steel frame of British rule in India. After the advent of Independence, the steel
frame was given the name of Indian Administrative Service (IAS). It was anticipated that the IAS
would represent the true spirit of public service and be fully responsive to the needs of Indian
people striving to establish a new socioeconomic system in independent India. Sardar Patel, the
great protagonist of AIS, remarked, 'Do not quarrel with instruments with which you want to
work. It is a bad workman who quarrels with the instruments. I have worked with them during the
difficult times. Remove them and see nothing but a picture of chaos all over the country' (Kumar,
1991). Pandit Nehru remarked that 'the old distinctions and differences are gone. In the difficult
days ahead our services and experts have a vital role to play and we invite them to do so as
comrades in the service of India' (Nehru, 2007, p. 14). It was expected that the ICS who once
governed the country would become dedicated servants of free India.

After independence, the politicians and the administrators had to tackle the problems of national
integration, legitimisation of the political regime, democratic sharing of political power and
economic development. Masses of the people were politically ill aware and structurally different.
They were required to be brought in the mainstream of not only national life but also were to be
made effective partners in the running of govern-ment. The objective of the decisions of the
government, the policies and their implementation, was to alleviate the difficulties of the people
of the country without any distinction. Describing the prevailing situation at that time Rienhhard
Bendix observed.

In Indian history there is no comparable legacy of an abstract principle of justice or of a

sovereign political order in which the several states and local communities could be integrated
through a system of representation. In the absence of such legacies modern India faces difficult
problems of integration. that, of establishing orderly relationship between the constituent units of
the society and the centres of governmental authorities. (Tummala, 1996)

Government is elected on the basis of universal adult franchise in India. An elected government
is keenly concerned with the need to motivate the work force to implement its objectives and
programmes. Politiciansshould realise that executives respond positively towards challenging
and satisfying work.

Politicians want their agenda acted upon right away to ensure that they have an impact during
the limited five years term of their administration. The success of a political administrative
challenges system depends on the implementation of the ideological concepts, psychological
values and the social programmes at all levels. Bureaucracy and the political leadership can
achieve this goal by working closely and critically. Their consensus can translate the political
manifesto of the government into administrative reality. The manifesto ultimately becomes the
social policy of the state. Once policy is laid down and the course of its implementation decided.
it remains for the administrator to see that the policy reaches every level of society. If political
leadership represents the input function the output would be achieved by the civil service. The
administrative structure is an integral link between polity and society.

In our administrative culture, power is a tool of dominance and we do not view it as an

opportunity to do good to people. Policy is seen by the minister only as power. It is left entirely to
civil servants to provide not only policy content but also value content. The first law of politics is:
get re-elected Politicians become unscrupulous, ideologically hollow, selfish and opportunistic.
They publicly blame civil servants for the failure or non-implementation of the policy. The civil
servants are not given the right of public vindication in such situations because of unconditional
anonymity. Blame the bureaucracy has come handy to the politicians when anything goes
wrong. The civil servants have been regarded as a stumbling block in the way of India's social
and economic progress. Politicians have stated time and again that the present bureaucracy
cannot meet the requirements of social and economic changes along socialist lines. "The
creation of administrative cadre committed to the national objectives and responsive to our
social needs, is an urgent necessity' (Maheshwari, 2001).

In the absence of ideological content, politics has become a game of controlling vote banks. The
vote banks become the real power behind the throne and a minister can ill afford to displease
them. He has to keep them on the right side which is usually the wrong side of administration.
The ministers blame that the administrative machinery has become unrespon-sive and
inefficient. They are constructively responsible for the mistakes of civil servants but they are not
ready to delegate powers to the officersbecause they think that ultimately they have to face the
assembly/parlia-ment and not the officers. This view is partially correct. The present-day
ministers are not heavy weights having full knowledge of administration and working of the
government. But they are important because they are ministers and some of them are eager to
flaunt their newly acquired status and power. This creates a dichotomy between policy
formulation and implementation. The dichotomy as a matter of a fact may be only theoretical
and artificial. No political system can survive without public support and mobilisation of public
support is the main function of a politician. He seems to be abandoning this legitimate function.
This function cannot be taken over by the civil servants. The inadequate knowledge of the role
of a public servant and a mistaken notion that he is no more than a direct and a voiceless
subordinate have created a situation in which the ministers have ordered the civil servants to
put up and shut up or do as I say. This tendency has curbed the initiative of not only civil
servants but also of politicians because the policy initiatives arise out of hidden agendas and not
out of public motives.

On the other hand, some civil servants have a feeling of self-assumed omniscience and
infallibility while giving advice to the political boss. Some officers develop cynicism and
frustration. Viceroy Lord Curzon had said once: "The Government of India was mighty and
miraculous machinery for doing nothing' (Murray, 1904). Our Vice President (later on President),
K.R. Narayanan, while addressing the probationers at LBSNAA had remarked: The complex
developed by the officers of the Indian Administrative service that only they can deal with the
real problems and are close to the people is wrong' (Lal, 2009). Civil servants are reluctant to
give credit to anybody else. It will be wrong on their part to hold in contempt politicians as a
class.

They are no match for a minister's practical field knowledge. They go by the stereotyped rules
and responses to policy initiative from the minister. They suffer from lack of courage to
communicate with people. They are ambitious and most of them resort to dishonest means and
believe in political wire pulling. A civil servant must not sabotage a policy because it has
emanated out of the manifesto of a political party because he considers it wrong. It will be
unethical on his part to do so. Without subscribing to any political ideology or programme, a civil
servant should create conditions for the proper implementation of programmes of theelected
government. He should remain completely neutral in the politi-cal debates and ideological
stands taken by the various political parties. Rather they should suggest techniques, ways and
means to implement the policies of the ruling party without causing difficulties to the people. The
concept of civil service neutrality implies that the civil servant should help the political masters to
enact their political programmes within the framework of law. He is ideologically neutral and
works for the success of the democratic system by simply guiding the politicians while remaining
completely non-aligned to the political parties.

Almond and Powell say

Bureaucracy dominate the output end of the political conversion process, they are indispensable
in the rule making adjudication process as well as influential in the political process of interest
articulation, aggregation, and communica-tion. Other governmental structure, such as political
executives, legislatures and courts must be viewed in relation to the functioning of bureaucracy.
They cannot be functionally effective save through bureaucracy. (Almond and Powell, 1978)

Thus the entire edifice of administration revolves around bureaucracy.

The administrative structure is concerned with the achievement of given social objectives and
emphasises the need of efficient means to accomplish them. The leadership structure is
concerned with the task of determining social objectives. This division of functions clearly
demarcates the jurisdic-tion of the leaders and administrators and if both of them strictly adhere
to their sphere of activities, the possibilities of attaining the systematic goal will be the maximum.
There are, however, ambiguities in such demarca-tions. At times, the civil service and the
political leaders do not have a clear understanding of such a demarcation. They have a
tendency towards monopolisation. The result is encroachment by one over the jurisdiction of
another and this will subvert the basis of political organisation. There is a clear line of distinction
between policy and administration. Best results can be achieved if both work in tandem. This is
possible when there is frequent interaction between the two and the decisions are arrived at on
the basis of mutual understanding and consensus. If such an interaction fails to develop, each
unit will stick to its own motion because each has the pride of opinion and the conviction of
being right.
[02/05/25 23:40] Diksha: Civil Service and Politicians

Experienced political leaders do not embarrass the administrators by putting unreasonable and
improper demands. They do not apply pres-sure on them to get their demands fulfilled. It is
incumbent upon the administration to evaluate the demands of political leaders rationally and
legally. If the demands put up by the political leaders are illegal and irrational, they should be
politely turned down. They are within their rights if they do not comply with unreasonable
demands of political leaders. But it must not be forgotten, as pointed out by Peter M. Blau, 'to
administer a social organisation according to technical criteria of rationality is irrational, because
it ignores the non-rational aspect of social aspect of conduct' (Lal, 2009).
The civil servants and the politicians must honestly be concerned with the realisation of
systematic goals. The scope of civil service activity is no longer confined to collection of revenue
and maintenance of law and order. It has to play a tremendous role in economic development
and social change. Without the financial backing nothing is likely to move and the civil servants
as well as politicians will prove ineffective. Political leaders make promises to people to
establish schools, hospitals, lay roads, provide employment to unemployed youths and so on.
All these promises are not backed by adequate financial resources. These promises remain
hollow and people start losing their faith in the system. The political leader conveniently blames
the administrators for the lapse. The recipro-cal image perception of both, administrator and
political leader, reflects disaffection and unfavourable induction of each other. The political
leader alleges that administrators are corrupt, rigid in their attitude and inefficient and interested
mainly in their own career prospects. They are neither impartial nor mete out fair treatment.
Political leaders believe that the administrators must work in the interest of the ruling groups.
Much cannot be expected from very rigid procedural oriented administrators.

The administrators feel that the political leaders are not receptive and responsive to their advice
and expertise. They feel that the political leaders do not appreciate their viewpoint as well as
their difficulties and their proposals are often ignored. The administration feels that the
politicalleaders give much more preference to the furtherance of narrow parochial interest. They
are incapable of managing public affairs and unnecessarily create trouble for the administration.
They have scant respect for admin-istrative rules, regulations and procedures.

The struggle between the political leadership and civil servant is, as a matter of fact, a struggle
for power. The administrator seeks protection under the plethora of civil service rules,
regulations and procedures and tries to protect himself by greater adherence to them. He also
musters the support of local leaders. At times, the administrators do not change their mindset
and even regard the reformatory measures as a challenge to their own position, power and
status. Thus the civil servants are suspected of being biased rather than neutral in their policy
perspective. They may even try to sabotage policy proposals that political leaders want to put
into effect. Therefore, neutrality of civil servant has been increasingly questioned. Even their
competence in rendering valuable suggestions for enacting legislative measures has come
under attack because of the increas-ing tendency of national policy makers to turn increasingly
to specialised technical agencies for designing government programmes. The neutral
competence provided by the administrative services did throw light on the dark corners of policy
issues. But now this competence has to accept the challenge of experts who are dominating the
entire gamut of economic and social activities. The new emerging activities require activism and
not the passivity of neutral competence. It seems that executive bureaucracy is ceasing to be a
source of neutral competence. The optimal blending of partisan responsiveness and continuity
in the form of policy compe-tence remain the most compelling methods for those committed to
the improvement of governance. The political leadership will direct the state apparatus towards
partisan priorities rather than completely override it.

The civil service must commit itself to the process of nation building and socio-economic
development. The administrators are to guide the politicians for broad developmental ideology
and cultural renaissance instead of serving as a stumbling block on the path of development.
Lucian Pye says, "The great problem today in nation building is that of relating the
administrative and authoritative structure of government to the political forces within the
transitional societies' (Pye, 1996).Neutrality Improves Efficiency

Neutrality will lead to efficiency and alertness. This concept has been illustrated remarkably by
Lord Attlee: "The same men who had worked out the details of Labour Transport Act were now,
at the behest of a conservative government, engaged in putting it to pieces' (Lal, 2009, p. 242).
He viewed the policy makers and decision makers as a single phenomenon which can never be
disentangled in practice; changes in political set-up should be of no consequence to the civil
servants. When Attlee succeeded Winston Churchill as prime minister of England, he took the
same team of officials, including the principal private secretary that had served under Churchill.
This is the finest tradition of British Civil Service which has become a pattern for others to follow.
The civil servants always like to work under an able, intelligent, sharp, alert and bold minister. A
good minister listens to his staff and encourages them for discussions and a good administrator
thoroughly does his home work and apprises the minister not only on policy but also on other
aspects of administration. It gives immense pleasure to the administrator when the minister
comes out successfully from the Parliament after dealing the Question Hour intelligently,
effectively and humorously. The political leadership must make use of the neutral competence.
Herbert Kaufman pointed out that

neutral competence is a wealth of knowledge and skill available in the cor-ridors of bureaucracy
that all elected officials, no matter what their political persuasion, could call upon for both useful
and disinterested advice in design-ing national policy. The declining faith in the neutral
competence of civil servants threatens to undermine the legitimacy of bureaucratic participation
in national policy making, because the courts have always regarded the pro-fessional expertise
of bureaucrats as the chief justification that can be given in a democracy for allowing such
unelected officials to have a major hand in shaping the country's policy decisions. (Lal, 2009, p.
242)

This neutral competence should mature into more advanced form of professionalism. The
trained bureaucrats provide the knowledge and skill that will enable the government to arrive
safely at its destination. The justification of the administrative system cannot be argued if the
civil servant does not display qualities necessary for efficient job performanceor he is held in low
esteem by people. Excessive demands for unreason-able and improper gratification make the
operation of legal and rational criterion of bureaucracy difficult. Appointments, writing of
confidential reports, promotions, postings and transfers should be sternly and rigidly objective
only then the system will work. Today, the selection and post-ings of officers are done on the
basis of their pliability and alignment. Appointments are made on considerations other than
merit. Officers are not posted on key positions on the basis of their toughness and
indepen-dence or intelligence and ability. The flexible officers rule the roost and get plum
postings while the independent-minded officers are sidelined. Political acceptability rather than
the personal qualities of head and heart determine the postings of officers.
The civil servants do not give expert advice but only act as staff officers to implement the orders.
They believe in the anticipatory compliance with the wishes of the political masters. They are
keen to find out what the minister feels before they pass their orders or tender advice. The civil
service goes not by convictions but by the direction of the wind. There is change of heart
overnight and the bureaucrats become supporters of the policy of a political party which is likely
to capture power and adapt themselves in advance to the political philosophy of the party. Thus,
bureaucracy has lost sensitivity to public service and public good.

Civil service should get out of self seeking. The political masters should also realise that
impartial, independent and neutral civil service is the sine qua non for an efficient administration.
This is possible only when the political masters give up their narrow political objectives and the
civil servants render rational advice to the political masters without any personal axe to grind.
According to B.K. Nehru, "The independence of civil services has been jeopardised by the
liberty given to the State Governments in the matters of transfer, suspension and promotion.
The power of transfer is very frequently used to bend an officer to the minister's will' (Nehru,
2009). There is no rule governing transfers which disturb the life of an officer. The power of
suspension also affects the independence of an officer. All these factors are not congenial for a
civil servant to act impartially and honestly. If the power of a politician to influence the transfer of
an officer is taken away, half the administrative problems will disappear and civil service will act
as a strong vibrant and independent arm of Indian democracy. When a political boss
transfershis subordinate who is a part of the bureaucratic elite, his decisions may be politically
motivated. In a society, where the public is educated and the mass media developed, the
political boss will have to justify his decision to remove senior bureaucrat from position of power.
Targeted bureaucrats, on the other hand, will try to defend themselves by proving their
innocence to the public and the authorities concerned. Therefore, political boss and the
bureaucratic elite are interlocked in a psychological warfare of image building and intense
politicking.

In services, godfatherism is dominating today. Officers even at the junior level do not struggle to
learn their jobs. They are more concerned to win the boss and the madam by resorting to all
sorts of tricks. The civil service has lost respect for lack of commitment and seldom owns up
responsibility in the eventuality of anything going wrong. It is the sacred duty of the civil servant
to be committed to the Constitution and give advice to the minister as per his interpretation of
the Constitution without fear or favour. Unfortunately, the civil servants have found it to be an
uphill task during the last 60 years. There have been occasions when the civil service had to
face a dilemma in India-whether to owe allegiance to the Constitution or to carry out orders of
the state administration in violation of the constitutional duties. The most glaring example that
can be cited here is that of the civil servants behaviour in Uttar Pradesh at the time of demolition
of a disputed structure at Ayodhya.

The political boss seeks transfer of the senior bureaucrat of his ministry on account of two
reasons-political or administrative accountability. The political boss perceives that high-level
public servants may prove liability to him. He may dislike him because of the latter's personality
and attitude, party affiliation and family background. He may have developed a personal
antagonism towards the bureaucrat. Sometimes the political boss has someone else in mind to
fill the position of the senior bureaucrat. The political boss prefers new men to old ones.

The other reason may be that the senior bureaucrat performs badly in his job. Such a civil
servant is inefficient. The reasons for transferring a subordinate official are administrative, and
not political. The senior bureaucrats may be transferred from high-level posts because of their
incompetence, disobedience, malfeasance, malpractice or corruption.

Another question baffling the minds of people is the question of responsibility. The ultimate
responsibility of government actions in theform of legislation, appointment, drafting of rule, and
general running of the state machinery lies with the minister. The civil servant acts as the
secretary of the department who guides, controls and educates the political head. But it is the
minister who is the target of attack in the parliament and not his secretary or staff. The officers
will feel guilty if they conceal facts and ill advise the ministers. Public policies enunciated by the
political boss run the risk of implementation if cooperation from the bureaucratic elite is not forth
coming. Similarly the bureaucratic elite will have Administrative Challenges a very difficult time
performing their jobs if their political bosses do not support them. If the political boss and the
bureaucratic elite do not get well together, the public organisation will suffer from rivalry and
conflict. Michael Rush and Philip Althoff have pointed out that the administrative machine is
such that the impact of politicians on administration and of administrator on policy is invari-ably
profound (Rush and Althoff, 1971). Emotions and ego are likely to dominate the interaction, at
times, between the minister and the civil servants. The civil servants have to choose between
unpleasantness and impropriety. The civil servants can take a stand provided they enjoy a
strong reputation for honesty and efficiency. Officers with a high degree of courage, self-respect
and detachment can come out unscathed. The skilful officers salvage situation without hurting
minister's ego. Civil servants at lower echelon of hierarchy can give a very good account of
themselves when they are supported by their superiors to take unpopular but correct decisions.
In the case of an individual officer, it will depend on his personality and ideological stand to
accept the challenge from his opponents in the pursuit of the policies which he deems correct.
The situation, at times, becomes complex because it will not be a proper development to make
administration a battleground between the officer and the minister. The causality will be public
good. On the other hand, any impropriety will be like a little pregnancy which is bound to grow
up. It is quite possible that if a bureaucrat yields once then there would

be no end of yielding to improper demands. The civil service should present an image of unified
professionalisa-tion so that no minister can have his way just by changing an officer. The
ministers may have short-term personal stakes but the civil service has an impersonal life term
perspective. Therefore, some conflict will be inevitable. These conflicts will get resolved by
maintaining perpetualneutrality and rationality. The minister would appear to be decisive and
benevolent in the secretariat. He will like to appear to be tough while dealing with his officers
because he wants to create an image of prestige and authority in public. His behaviour may not
be the same in a secretariat room. The civil service must not hesitate to apprise the minister the
pros and cons of his programmes in a dispassionate manner.
Rejected politicians create strife in the society by exploiting caste/communal feelings. They
keep an eye on the creation of vote banks by segregating people. No candidate for state
legislature and Lok Sabha should be declared elected unless he secures a minimum of 51 per
cent of the votes. This will imply an appeal by the candidate to all sections of the society
irrespective of caste/community. Administrative tensions, to some extent, will get mitigated by
such a move. The representation of People's Act, 1951, should be amended for the purpose.
The move will also ensure that politicans do not derive strength based on factionalism. They will
behave in an impartial/neutral manner among castes and communities.

Development of a performance management system covering pri-orities, objectives,

performance indicators, strategy, plans and outcomes are to be put in place. Submission of
annual Performance Report by 30 June to government comparing goals set and achieved
feedback from users, standards of service delivery, quality of service, plan of action for next year
well in time, etc., would play a constructive role in ensuring quality of service.