tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8561209253464577539.post4916797090760480031..comments2024-03-28T15:39:27.271+05:30Comments on View from [Greater] Kailash: BUREAUCRATS DON'T NEED FIXED TENURES-THEY NEED STRONGER SPINES.Avay Shuklahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02928879917197239026noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8561209253464577539.post-27777298224276414322013-11-05T14:14:15.294+05:302013-11-05T14:14:15.294+05:30Congrats for bringing to discussion a topic close ...Congrats for bringing to discussion a topic close to the hearts of the most government servants particularly the B (bureaucrats). About a decade back while discussing similar issues, someone termed pliable/spineless officers as ‘vibhishan’. When pointed out that Vibhishan was just one entity who brought down the whole empire but here we are dealing with certainly more than just one, did the reality dawn upon most (Vibhishanon ki sena hai, ek Bhagwan hamesha kam padega). Hence, choice available with the P today is very wide, deep enough to keep the ‘spined’ officers perpetually on the margin or ignored till they actually retire. Once on the margin, even ‘spined’ ones generally turn silent after sometime. As such, the ‘spining’ (of supine)/providing spine’ is also not arrant solution. There is no denying that the Spined Officers do play a strong role and can deliver but democracy and governance cannot be left to just a handful individuals. For, the spined too are in extremely limited supply.<br />I agree that Civil Services Board will very much act, behave and work like Police Boards. I do not think that a Board can be a complete solution. Security of tenure can be used to keep the spineless/vibhishans in the driving seat for much longer duration than currently being afforded. It is also observed that a number of spineless/vibhishans continue in key positions (with some cosmetic changes) despite change in the government. It is a sure sign that P as a class (no party in particular) seeks and gets the spineless to serve their ends; in the process clearly conveying the (undeclared) message that ‘spined’ is not wanted any longer – a la ‘caught in the wrong job’ syndrome for the spined. Hence, the order of the Apex Court can be used both ways – it is a double edged sword. Something else involving a third party either J or N (J = judiciary; N = NGO/CSO/NPO) or may be both would be more effective –outsiders’ scrutiny and possibility of exposure exerts greater pressure than review by a Board consisting of assenters. Most may note that P is almost always afraid of bad press/media; then, why not use it to strengthen the system. The West has been doing it since long. Complete transparency is the only workable solution. <br />Our democracy is designed to be a structure in which power balance game has to go on. The three pillars competed and as of now P is in commanding position (making the hay and letting the system go haywire) while J is trying to bring some order. It is time the much needed space is given to the N also which can act on behalf of the civil society (for saner elements amongst us) till the voter is enlightened enough to choose a leader who is truly concerned about the nation and its governance. God only knows when that day will come in this country, West hasn’t got one yet. Even for the awakened voters, someone has to speak in between those five years after each election. Again, transparency works better. As such, NGO/CSO/NPO deserves some voice (formal role) in the system more than ever before. We may think of ways to engage them because the question whether to involve them has already been answered. Let us hope that it may improve the situation. Maha Moorkh Atmahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03832460457043012648noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8561209253464577539.post-30269939786728650932013-11-05T08:13:18.699+05:302013-11-05T08:13:18.699+05:30Avay, if you are from St. Xavier's - Calcutta ...Avay, if you are from St. Xavier's - Calcutta - 1967-70 - this note is likely to strike a chord. Shiva(ji) Vohra who lived down the hall from you and left for Columbia University in 1971. Pls respond, with your email - would be delighted to re-establish contact! - svohra111@gmail.comsvohrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05213622286703209856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8561209253464577539.post-45880361715060337922013-11-05T08:00:32.305+05:302013-11-05T08:00:32.305+05:30Well, I have seen a young and principled officer (...Well, I have seen a young and principled officer (Yes, even today we are getting some into the IAS) being transferred half a dozen times (no exaggeration) in less than a year and half. He didn't mind the personal inconvenience. What hurt him was the frustration of getting involved with his work, learning something, starting something and then having to move without being able to take it to completion. An officer who is not affected by frequent transfers, because he has developed a stoic attitude towards personal inconvenience, is not passionate about his work. This officer in question is still young, and his enthusiasm is not yet fully eroded, but give another ten years and he would also join the ranks of the VRS - the virtual retirement scheme - of the IAS in which you are still in service, you get your full pay and perks but you do practically nothing. The point I wish to make is that frequent transfers are a problem that needs addressing. Dismissing this problem on the ground of 'personal inconvenience' is not correct.<br /><br />Having said that I agree that fixing tenures is not the best solution. I know of a state that has implemented the new Indian Police Act on paper. SHOs have fixed tenures, yet the average tenure of an SHO has shrunk to six months since its implementation. The solution the system has found is to take a request from the SHO for transfer! I am not aware of a single case where the concerned SHO refused to give a request.<br /><br />Things today are a lot worse than they were when you and I joined service. The young officers of today are working under tremendous pressure. We at least had the sense of security that no one will question our motives unless we do something really bad. Today vigilance and CBI inquiries are routine. I am amazed that so many young officers are still working with dedication, honesty and enthusiasm. Hat's off to them!Subodhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04360634974291570405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8561209253464577539.post-47686715447442705462013-11-04T23:15:40.146+05:302013-11-04T23:15:40.146+05:30A well argued case for why the Supreme Court presc...A well argued case for why the Supreme Court prescription won't work, and can make some things worse. But I don't think blame (and potential solution) can be transferred from political leaders to bureaucrats since spineless bureaucrats are a result of the formers' choices and our political system. Even if 80% of our bureaucrats miraculously developed a backbone and objective neutrality the unscrupulous political leaders can pick among the remaining 20% for key positions. This is specially true given the trend over the years of reaching deep down the seniority ladder to get the kind of politically committed and pliant cronies that politicians want. In other words a rotten political core corrupts bureaucracy that works under and around it. <br /><br />The ideal situation in a democracy would be to have enlightened voters elect good politicians with nationalistic outlook, but that's far-fetched given an ignorant and ethnically divided populace. I'm wondering if it'll help to have an even stronger central government and a "run-off" plurality election system that results in a national party and leadership in firm control for a given period. That will mitigate the problem of these corrupt state leaders with strong parochial (caste and/or community based) support. And bureaucrats appointed by a more remote center may be less vulnerable to petty politicking..SandipMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04721935576457691892noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8561209253464577539.post-84613529602769897692013-11-04T20:23:25.417+05:302013-11-04T20:23:25.417+05:30A great write up ! Yes,I do vociferously agree wit...A great write up ! Yes,I do vociferously agree with the writer that blaming 'P' all the time is an alibi for the incompetent bureaucrats. They need to do vigorous exercise to strengthen their SPINES [BB]. Anupam Shuklahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06689753216416338625noreply@blogger.com