Wrong measure: Change in IPS deputation rule on IAS

It is a well understood saying that the wrong remedy can aggravate a disease and cannot cure it. This holds true for the central government (Department of Personnel and Training – DoPT). Proposal to amend rule 6 of the IAS (Cadre) Rules, 1954 relating to deputation of cadre officers., Reports have shown that deputation from states to the central government has been uneven. Some states have not adequately designated officers for deputation to work with the central government; This includes West Bengal (11 out of 280 officers are on central deputation), Rajasthan (13 out of 247) and Telangana (7 out of 208 authorized strength). This has led to vacancies in Central Government Ministries. numbers accessed by Hindu show that as actual deputation One percent of essential reserves fell from 69% (2014) to 30% (2021), suggesting that the recognition of shortfall in deputation to DoPT is an issue, has merit. But does this require a change in the rules proposed by the DoPT, including for the central government to have overriding powers that would do away with getting approvals from states for transfer of IAS and IPS officers?

Two rules are particularly problematic – in case of any disagreement between the central and state governments, states will implement the former’s decision “within a specified time”. And in certain “specific situations”, states will have to depute certain cadres whose services are sought by the central government. These changes amount to rotating states and unwilling bureaucrats to be deputed to serve the central government and also submit one. fait accompli States for “specific conditions” that are not defined and are prone to misinterpretation and politicization. These proposed changes have surprisingly added to the difficulties of the state governments. As governance responsibilities during the pandemic have shown, states are heavily dependent on bureaucracy, and deputation to the central government should not be done at the expense of state requirements. At the same time, the central government must address the key question of the reluctance of competent civil servants to depute away from the states. Reports have indicated that civil servants find a top-down culture dominant in central government offices and prefer relative autonomy at the state level. There is clearly a need for a more qualitative approach to dealing with such work culture issues. Also, take a look at a state-by-state deputation that discourages states that depute officers far below the number mandated to the central government by adjusting a review of future cadre strength by the Union Public Service Commission, They should also address the problem of scarcity. These moves are better than any rule changes that amount to fiat attacking federalism.