SC APPROVES EXTENSION OF DELHI CHIEF SECRETARY: WHY GOVERNMENTS KEEP THEIR BUREAUCRATS

Print

THE CONTEXT: The Supreme Court’s pronouncement that the extension to the Chief Secretary of Delhi does not violate any rule turned a nail-biting thriller into a damp squib. The Centre granted extension to the  Chief Secretary of Delhi, and the apex court said it found nothing wrong with that.

ABOUT THE CHIEF SECRETARY OF THE STATE

Appointment: Chief Secretaries are chosen by the Chief Minister of State.

• All Chief Secretaries of Delhi have invariably been appointed by the Ministry of Home Affairs, which is the cadre-controlling authority of IAS and IPS officers of the AGMUT cadre (to which now the J&K cadre has been added).

Position: The Chief Secretary is the senior-most cadre post in the state administration, ranking 23rd on the Indian order of precedence. The Chief Secretary acts as the principal advisor to the chief minister on all matters of state administration and is the seniormost functionary of the civil services in a state.

Tenure: The office of Chief Secretary has been excluded from the operation of the tenure system. There is no fixed tenure for this post.

Functions: The Chief Secretary of Delhi performs two kinds of functions. He reports directly to the Lieutenant Governor on entries 1, 2 and 18 of List II of the Constitution of India, which pertain to police, law and order and land.

ALL INDIA SERVICES

• Their recruitment, training, discipline, age of retirement and retirement benefits emanate from the All India Services Act.
• The Act does not acknowledge extensions as normal but the rules provide for exceptions.
• Rule 16 of the All India Services (Death Cum Retirement) Benefits Rules, 1958 required the State government to make a recommendation for the six-month extension with the prior approval of the Union government.

ISSUES

• The Chief Secretary of NCT of Delhi is answerable only to the central government for matters relating to these three entries, which form the core of any government. Hence, if the central government so chooses (as it has) to extend the services of the Chief Secretary, it has not only the authority but its own justification to continue with the officer, regardless of the Delhi government.
• Since the incumbent Chief Secretary of Delhi has been accused of corruption involving a company where his son works, the government should have come up with another name.

THE WAY FORWARD

• The government should implement the provisions of FR 56(j) and compulsorily retire those whose record doesn’t measure up – not sporadically — but by using transparent benchmarks to cut out the deadwood, before it becomes a burden.

CONCLUSION:

Extending tenures should not be a routine practice but a well-justified decision based on pre-determined criteria. This ensures the selection process is objective and merit-based, minimizing potential bias or political influence. Ultimately, the focus should remain on upholding high standards of governance and ensuring efficient administration for the benefit of the people.

PREVIOUS YEAR QUESTION:

Q) Initially Civil Services in India were designed to achieve the goals of neutrality and effectiveness, which seems to be lacking in the present context. Do you agree with the view that drastic reforms are required in Civil Services. Comment. (2017)

MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION:

Q) “Is it appropriate for state governments to grant extensions to Chief Secretaries”, even if the government feels comfortable with known people’’. Discuss

SOURCE: https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/sc-approves-extension-of-delhi-chief-secretary-naresh-kumar-9050067/