Congress leader Rahul Gandhi recently pushed for a separate quota for Other Backward Classes in the Women’s Reservation Bill and emphasised how OBC officers are underrepresented in the top bureaucracy. “I asked myself how many of these secretaries are from the OBC community and was shocked and shattered to find out the answer. Only 3 of them are from the OBC community and only manage 5% of India’s budget,” he said. The MP highlighted the issue in successive rallies and press conferences as well.
The Narendra Modi government responded by ignoring Gandhi’s assertions and counter-questioning the Congress about not advocating for the same when it was in power. “In 1992, the batch of secretaries currently serving in the Government of India began their journey. During that period, the Congress Party remained in power for most of the time. Then why did they not pay attention to OBC representation?” asked Union minister Kiren Rijiju on X (formerly Twitter).
As the OBCs are the current flavour of politics in India and a few big states are set to go to polls over the next few months, not to mention the upcoming Lok Sabha election in 2024, a lot of politicking is going to happen around this issue.
But here’s a more important point. The underrepresentation of the OBCs, or the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) at the top echelons of the bureaucracy is not a problem associated with any specific government. We need a systemic approach to correct the course. Two solutions come to mind: The government must fix the tenure of the officers when they enter the service and provide all of them with equal durations. Moreover, it must make empanelment for the top positions non-discretionary, matrix-based, and transparent.
Also read: Stop criticising consulting firms. They fill gaps created by civil servants who stop upskilling
Three things we must know
Before proceeding with the discussion, three things must be stated clearly.
First, the government has substantiated the lack of diversity in the top bureaucracy in India. “Out of a total of 322 officers currently holding the posts of Joint Secretaries and Secretaries under Central Staffing Scheme in different ministries/departments, 16, 13, 39 and 254 belong to SC, ST, OBC and General category, respectively.”
In March 2022, too, the government provided us with similar data: “Out of 91 Additional Secretaries, the number of officers belonging to SC/ST and OBC communities are 10 and 4 respectively, and out of 245 Joint Secretaries, the number of officers belonging to SC/ST and OBC communities are 26 and 29 respectively.”
Second, the situation was the same during the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government — and the lack of diversity bled into the years that followed. Data from 2015 shows that among 70 Secretaries, there were only 3 SC, 3 ST, and zero OBC officers. Out of 278 Joint Secretaries, there were only 24 SC, 10 ST, and 10 OBC officers.
Third, representation matters. Democracies cease to be representative when the population is inadequately represented in the country’s institutions. This was argued by Jyotiba Phule when he said that the Pune Sarvajanik Sabha can’t be called a sarvajanik sabha if only a few castes are in control. That argument is reflected in Article 16(4) of the Constitution as well: “Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens which, in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State.”
Also read: Every UP IAS officer is dreading a list. Unhappy CM Yogi jumping in to…
Left out of the race
Now we can ask the question: Why are SCs, STs, and OBCs underrepresented in the top layers of the bureaucracy?
The first reason is the difference in tenure and age criteria for the Civil Services Examination for different categories. The upper age limit for candidates from the general and Economically Weaker Section (EWS) categories is 32, whereas for OBC and SC/ST members, it is 35 and 37. Therefore, many of the SC, ST, and OBC candidates have shorter service tenures than the unreserved and EWS candidates and retire early. Theoretically, there can even be a service tenure gap of 16 years — EWS and unreserved candidates can enter service at the age of 21, whereas an SC candidate may start at 37.
Cabinet Secretariat data from 2004 shows that on average, unreserved candidates enter the service at the age of 24.7 years, whereas SC, ST, and OBC members do so at 27.6 years, 26.9 years, and 27.1 years respectively. This data was collected for the Second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) Report in 2005. It implies that the unreserved candidates are getting, on average, three more years of service. The commission reported that “these late entrants will have a shorter service span, which means that they may not have adequate opportunities to contribute to policy-making at higher levels”. Furthermore, the commission noted that the average age of entry in the case of reserved entrants was on the rise. “Clearly, there has been a retrogression in the age profile of officers belonging to these categories with very few of them being available for posts at the level of Secretary,” it read.
As seniority in terms of years in service is one of the most important criteria for empanelment for the senior positions, many SC, ST, and OBC candidates are left out of the race. The Kothari Commission even favoured only two attempts, not only for the general candidates but also for SC/ST members.
The Second ARC recommended: “The permissible age for appearing in the Civil Services Examination should be 21 to 25 years for general candidates, 21 to 28 years for candidates from OBC and 21 to 29 years for candidates from SC/ST and PH. This will make every entrant to the service, at least theoretically, eligible to be empanelled for the secretary post.”
Another solution, which might sound a bit radical, is to fix the year of service as a condition for retirement. There can be a fixed tenure for all officers, irrespective of entry age. At the same time, the government must ensure that the scope of arbitrariness, discrimination, and subjectivity in the matter of career progression of the officers is reduced.
Reduce subjectivity
The second reason is the subjective process of empanelment for higher positions. In this process, the government first considers applications from eligible candidates. Ideally, the willing candidates should be judged on merit, accountability, efficiency, bent toward action, and so on. But these are all subjective criteria, and in a divided society like India, it is very difficult to create ideal situations. If subjective bias cannot be reduced realistically, then there should be a system in place that allows everyone completing stipulated tenure to automatically become eligible for a higher position.
Discrimination on the basis of caste in administrative service is difficult to prove. But we just can’t pretend not to see the elephant in the room.
To decrease arbitrariness and subjectivity in top bureaucracy, the First ARC recommended that Only 5 to 10 per cent of the civil servants engaged in work of a similar nature and at the same level in any organisation be given the grade “fit for promotion out of turn”. I don’t see any reason against the implementation of this idea. In 2004, the Hota Committee suggested replacing the Annual Confidential Report (ACR) with a new system, which would focus more on evaluating performance based on clear work plans and objective measures. This evaluation measure must be put into effect.
Dilip Mandal is the former managing editor of India Today Hindi Magazine, and has authored books on media and sociology. He tweets @Profdilipmandal. Views are personal.
(Edited by Humra Laeeq)