At the outset, I must say that my namesake with a different surname, Sanjeev Sanyal, has made a significant contribution to the way we look at our history. His books, The Land of the Seven Rivers and The Ocean of Churn, as well as his latest offering, Revolutionaries, show the marks of deep scholarship and research. I must confess that I have not read his other books, but I would like to believe that the same empirical rigour would have been applied to these as well.
It is therefore a tad disappointing that Sanyal, a member of the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister, should have come out with an impressionistic and anecdotal critique about the UPSC being a “waste of time” while speaking on entrepreneur and YouTuber Siddhartha Ahluwalia’s The Neon Show. Hundreds of thousands of young women and men spend years trying to crack the UPSC exam to enter the portals of government. In Sanyal’s view, the energies of the young people should instead be geared to start-ups and entrepreneurship. “If you must dream, surely you should dream to be Elon Musk or Mukesh Ambani. Why do you dream to be joint secretary?” he said.
Sanyal is not alone in this attempt to run down the dreams of aspirants, a vast majority of whom come from aspirational districts and Tier II/III cities. Like the protagonist of the film 12th Fail, many come from families that are not so well-endowed either in resources or cultural capital— privileges that both Sanyal and I were fortunate to receive by birth.
Critiques such as Sanyal’s compound too many issues—five to be exact. The first is the sheer numbers who are trying to make it through the UPSCs. Second is the number of attempts made by candidates. Third is the ‘general nature’ of the examination, which tests the same competencies for roles spanning the audit and accounting service to the diplomatic corps. Fourth is an assertion that ‘bright minds’ should be ‘entrepreneurial’ to increase the nation’s wealth and, thereby, well-being. Fifth, and this is the worst, is the claim that government sector jobs are not challenging enough—that even joint secretaries only ‘push files’ and are not engaged in the creative processes of reimagining governance.
The purpose of this column is not to refute everything that my namesake has to say. What is empirical cannot be contested. However, as an IAS officer for nearly 36 years, I will challenge certain opinions and presumptions.
Also Read: Toppers to ex-IAS officers are mired in ‘dark patterns’ of coaching ads. Govt is right to act
Correcting the exam system
Let me address the first two points together. There is certainly a wide gap between demand and supply of government positions. Even if demand plateaus in the coming years, the number of aspirants cannot come down unless there is a restriction on the number of attempts.
In my view, this can be countered using a two-pronged approach— extending the validity of Prelims marks for a two year-period, and allowing a maximum of two attempts in the general and three in the special categories. This will also enable the candidates to focus on the Mains exam, thereby improving their level of preparation. Also, if a candidate does not make it in two or three consecutive Prelims (as the case may be), she may be counselled to try for another career.
With regard to the general nature of the exam, I propose making General Studies even more comprehensive, merging the ethics and essay papers, and insisting on a marked paper from any one of the 22 languages in the Eighth Schedule. I suggest doing away with the optional paper altogether, and substituting it with four domain papers—constitutional law and political economy for the IAS; law and criminal justice administration for the IPS; foreign policy and international relations for the foreign service; and finance, accounting, and public policy for the revenue and accounting group of services. Aspirants could be allowed to opt for any two of these domain papers. This will also ensure that candidates begin to exercise their choices and options carefully.
Entrepreneurship isn’t everything
Can everyone aspire to be an entrepreneur? True, there is an entrepreneurial ecosystem among the traditional business classes, especially in states such as Maharashtra, Gujarat, Punjab, and Andhra Pradesh—and one does note fewer aspirants from these states compared to UP, Rajasthan, Bihar, MP, Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand.
But for most agrarian societies, the leap of faith required for entrepreneurship is a tough challenge. When there are responsibilities towards families—ageing or aged parents, siblings who are still pursuing their education—risk-taking ability gets considerably restricted.
Then there is the matter of personal choice. Had my life taken a different trajectory, I, for one, would have chosen a career in media and /or academics—for I love dabbling with ideas and words. Would that make my contribution to the nation any less? Others may want to pursue different professions—law, architecture, software, and so on. Why this obsession with ‘wealth creation’ and maximising shareholder value? And how about politics? Should this not attract bright young women and men across the political spectrum as well?
Also Read: Not just Kota factories, we need to talk about delayed induction of state officers to IAS
The joint secretary ‘dream’
Finally, I will challenge anyone and everyone who claims that the civil services don’t offer avenues for growth and innovation.
Outside of active politics, there is no other profession that gives a young person such an opportunity to work at all levels in the governance of the nation, from nutrition to education to financial inclusion to the enforcement of rights. The district administration provides the widest possible spectrum, from the conduct of elections to running the pulse polio campaign to managing crop insurance schemes. This happens when the officer is typically in their thirties.
Later, upon joining the Government of India on central deputation as a joint secretary, the job profile expands even further. Responsibilities include responding to parliamentary questions, preparing cabinet memoranda, representing the country in bilateral and multilateral negotiations, addressing issues of interstate coordination, enforcement of central legislation, and defending government positions in courts of law.
In my five-year tenure as a joint secretary, there was never a dull moment: if anything, one was hard-pressed for time even on weekends.
The challenge for a joint secretary is not on the professional front, but in maintaining work-life balance and trying hard to prevent additional layers to your midriff. There is also the infinite satisfaction of having done your bit—in my case, this included the establishment of value chains and agricultural logistics for high-value crops, procurement of pulses, and the (sometimes successful) attempts at stabilising the price of onions by tweaking the EXIM policy.
Many joint secretaries also sit on the boards of corporations and apex co-operatives, where they contribute not just to the formulation but also to the implementation of decisions that have a direct and deep impact on the lives of millions of people. So, whether it is the Ease of Doing Business (EODB), or the Ease of Living (EOL), or helping India reach the pole position in 2047, there is no better career than that of a civil servant. Vive la civil services! Vive la Bharat!
Sanjeev Chopra is a former IAS officer and Festival Director of Valley of Words. Until recently, he was Director, Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration. He tweets @ChopraSanjeev. Views are personal.
(Edited by Asavari Singh)
Sanjeev Sanyal makes a deeper point, which is in line with how society transforms as it develops. We should be cautious not to misconstrued it as an attack on civil services.
Civil services by nature are public services and therefore an aspirant’s motivation to join, must stem from a genuine spirit of service (seva bhav). Therefore, we must question if this is indeed the spirit which eggs most aspirants in India or is it the lure of power and social status – anachronistic feudal tendencies which began with the British Raj’s administrative service and its style of governance in the sub-continent.
In advanced nations, with institutionalised rules, most civil servant jobs now are mundane and administrative. Though these too had started off centuries ago as sinecures from political patronage. The lure of these positions transformed as societies modernized and access to public services ceased to become a function of a citizen’s personal network.
So too will and is happening in India. It is inevitable and is a good thing. Sanjeev Sanyal is correct and forward looking when he suggests that the best brains in the country must pursue innovation and growth, instead of blindly pursuing feudalistic power dynamics.