The Hindu : National : Fixed tenure planned for Home, Defence Secretaries

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Feb 09, 2005

National

National

Fixed tenure planned for Home, Defence Secretaries

By Harish Khare

NEW DELHI, FEB. 8. The Manmohan Singh Government is believed to have decided to give a two-year fixed tenure to the next Union Home Secretary and the Defence Secretary, according to authoritative sources. The new arrangement is expected to be formalised before the current Home Secretary, Dhirendra Singh, retires at the end of March. The incumbent Defence Secretary, Ajay Vikram Singh, retires at the end of July.

This type of fixed tenure is applicable so far only in the case of the three defence services chiefs and the Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation. A two-year tenure for the CBI Director was enjoined by the Supreme Court.

A similar arrangement was put in place in the case of Cabinet Secretary when the National Democratic Alliance Government gave a two-year term, first to T.S.R. Prasad, and then to Kamal Pande. However, the two-year sanctity did not work in favour Mr. Pande. He was moved out of the Cabinet Secretariat by the Manmohan Singh Government even before he completed his fixed tenure, though he was allowed to serve out (as Chairman of the Inter-State Council) the remainder of the extended two-year period.

Initially, the proposal was to include the Finance Secretary also, but it was felt that given the structure of the Finance Ministry there was no case for a fixed term.

Need for continuity

The rationale for the proposed arrangement is the need for a "sustained continuity" of personnel in the principal areas of policy-making. Ever since the Manmohan Singh Government took office, considerable thought is being given to improving the administration's delivery system. One suggestion that has emerged is the need for continuity of personnel.

Records show that more often than not most officials do get to play a limited innings as Secretaries. As one senior bureaucrat put it: "By the time a Secretary gets an idea what the Ministry is all about, it is time for him to pack his bags. Involvement and motivation suffer."

Mixed views

The proposal has expectedly sparked an internal debate within the senior echelons of the IAS bureaucracy, a corps that even otherwise zealously guards the rites of seniority and entitlements. Current and former officials hold mixed views; while most concede the rationale, they also insist that the proposal be implemented honestly. There is the apprehension that limiting the proposed fixed term to just two Ministries may mean that the idea is "individual-centric."

Ideally, argues one senior Secretary, the principle of fixed tenure is most applicable in the case of the Planning Commission or Ministries such as Personnel, which is "a web of rules, intricacies, precedents and procedures." Another former senior bureaucrat argues that it is wrong in principle to categorise some Ministries as requiring the continuity of personnel.

"Why build up this cult of indispensability? Nobody is and nobody should be indispensable. Look at all our scientific establishments where this or that individual has come to represent `continuity'; these institutions have become personal fiefdoms," asserts another Secretary.

The fear is that this well-meaning proposal would be hijacked to favour some bureaucrats. The Manmohan Singh Government is not deemed to have made any substantial difference to the culture of politicisation and favouritism in the bureaucracy. On taking office, the UPA Government made a statement when it shifted out the Defence and Home Secretaries (both appointees of the NDA Government and both "young" officers who would have provided the now-valued "continuity"). The Manmohan Singh regime would make another statement when it becomes known who is the first beneficiary of the proposed two-year term.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National