The author is a government officer who prefers to remain anonymous.

It is quite amusing to note that on one hand government policies are framed after much deliberation and that too after much passage of time, from the date such an idea emanates in certain minds to the date of issue of such a policy for implementation. On the other hand, after declaration of a policy all sorts of impediments are created by the vested interests, whose only target is to scuttle the implementation of such a well-thought of policy. A case in brief stated below will make the issue raised clear.

A rotational transfer policy has been laid down for the central secretariat service (CSS) as per which all the grades in CSS are to be transferred from one ministry to another after putting in a specified number of years of service in the ministry. It does not need a PhD in rocket science to understand the purpose for which such a policy has been framed. It could be primarily for four reasons:

a) Vested interest creeps in the system in case a person continuously holds the post for a number of years. The person manning the post behaves like ‘one who knows all’ and this leads to a dangerous situation most of the times, affecting the delivery system.

b) Continuously performing the same monotonous, repetitive work over a number of years affects the psychology of the person, leading to boredom and frustration.

c) The person is not exposed to new areas of work, resulting thereby in retardation of mind and in his capacity building. In such a situation not only the person suffers but the nation as a whole.

d) All sorts of allegations fly around, alleging that the person manning the post is receiving favours, favouring a section of persons etc. This only brings the morale down and thus again no purpose served in his continuance.

The government being a model employer would have definitely kept in view many such factors before framing the RTP for CSS officers. But astonishingly, it is observed that even when a proposal is put up by the senior officers and later on approved by the minister, some vested elements do their best to see that the directions of the minister are in no way implemented. In such times, it becomes incumbent on the minister to create a mechanism to ensure that his/her policy directions don’t end up being mere paper tigers.

A case in point is about the RTP in the grade of under-secretaries of CSS.

As per the RTP, the stipulated tenure of under-secretaries of CSS in one particular ministry is five years. More than 150 under-secretaries are overstaying beyond the five-year tenure and this shows poor implementation of the policy. It is known that in earlier this year in response to MPs’ letters, a decision was taken, with the approval of the minister, to transfer officers in the under-secretary grade who had spent more than five years as on 1.1.2013. Even after this decision the officers are still continuing in their ministries, thanks to the laxity on the part of DoPT, the department mandated to implement the policy. This shows the government as a whole very poor light.

Urgent action must be taken to implement the RTP. A single day’s delay together with the delay added to subsequent relieval orders would only make a mockery of the policy.

If you are a bureaucrat and want to share a anecdote or an experience that throws light on how governance actually works (or does not), you can contact us: we will keep your identity confidential while publishing what you have to say. Write to us at editors@governancenow.com