Case Study

The transfer of civil servants remains one of the most important issues ailing Indian civil services. It is more seen as punishment rather than reward. It is known by different names like garage postings, suitcase officers, ‘Kala Pani’ and punishment posting. There are some officers who have been transferred more than 50 times. IAS officer Ashok Khemka, for instance, has been transferred 52 times in 33 years of his service. IPS officer D Roopa, who has been transferred at least 42 times in 20 years of her career, reportedly for standing up to corruption. India has many such ‘Kala Pani’ postings that are not limited to the Northeast alone. States such as Chhattisgarh, Bihar, Odisha, West Bengal, Kerala in east, central and south India respectively have many forested and under-developed regions where officers are routinely transferred as a way to teach them a lesson. Little has changed over the years, but the ambiguity over how postings are assigned came to the fore when the Ministry of Home Affairs recently transferred two IAS officers, a husband and wife, after a media report claimed they shut down a stadium early to walk their dog. The government did not initiate an inquiry into the allegation, but hours after the report was published, followed by social media outrage, the husband and wife were separated and given different postings. Senior IAS officer Sanjeev Khirwar was transferred to Ladakh, and his wife Rinku Dugga sent to Arunachal Pradesh. Both these postings are part of the AGMUT (Arunachal Pradesh-Goa-Mizoram and Union Territory) cadre of IAS, and both the officers belong to this cadre. Any officer under the AGMUT cadre can be posted in the northeastern states or to the Union territories. However, the transfers were made out to be punishments, which in turn triggered outrage. Even though there is an appointments committee at the Centre and committees under the chief minister’s office in the states, but still postings are assigned as per the whims of the ruling dispensation to put an officer in place. The process of transfers, removals and postings without any set rules is generally seen as a ‘shake up’, but it cuts both ways. To penalise an officer, governments often send them to a remote or less developed region to teach them a lesson. But, in the process, it creates an adverse perception for the specific location. Suppose you are an IAS officer and you have also been transferred more than 30 times in a span of 20 years of your career, then

a) Generally, what are the options available before a civil servant in case of transfer to redress his/her grievances?

b) Critically evaluate each option and suggest the most appropriate option giving reasons.

c) What more you think can be done to address the issue of frequent postings and transfers which are based on non-merit consideration?

Answer:

The Context: Transfer of civil servants has been a major concern for many in the civil services despite some established standards followed by the government. Many civil servants feel demotivated due to frequent transfers and it affects their ability to contribute towards the nation building process.

At the same time, it is argued that transfer of civil servants is the prerogative of political executives and thus allegations of politically motivated transfers arise.

Civil service values suggest that civil servants should work with impartiality, neutrality, anonymity, and public service motive in whatever position he/she has been assigned.

a) Options available with civil servants are as follows:

1. A civil servant should continue to serve with public service motive, although in extreme cases, one can seek redressal of grievances through court.

2. Directly go to CAT (Central Administrative Tribunal) for grievance redressal.

3. Don’t act in a fashion which may result in politically motivated transfer.

4. Quit services as some civil servants have done in the past.

b) Evaluating the options:

 Most appropriate option is – ‘Option-a’

Reasons:

• Government doesn’t have fixed criteria for deciding promotions based on merit and age (experience) especially at field level. It has discretion to appoint the best minds in important administrative positions as it feels. It means the government has the prerogative to appoint and transfer civil servants at will.
• There are several factors which contribute to such transfers: routine activities, bringing right person at right position, maintaining dynamism and motivation, right utilisation of human resource, rotation, etc.
• Although ego needs are important, for civil servants, ego-needs should not be higher than public service spirit and public interest.
• Promotions, transfers are part and parcel of the service. It should not affect the service spirit. Otherwise, if everyone starts seeking good positions, postings, then who will work in other positions.
• Even the Court led or CAT interventions have not led to reversal of government decisions related to promotion. Very few cases have seen reversal. The two prominent cases are as follows:

The two examples of revocation of transfers

In 2017, Senkumar was Kerala’s Director General of Police but transferred by the government on the charges of mishandling of one fire incident in which over 100 people died. But was reinstated by the SC.

IAS officer Rohini Sindhuri Dasari, who had taken on the state government and the political bosses, has won the legal battle over her transfer and returned as the Deputy Commissioner (DC) of Hassan on Monday. The state government was compelled to submit before the Karnataka High Court that it would reinstate her. She had in her petition contended that she was transferred from the post of DC prematurely on March 7, 2018, at the behest of then CM Siddaramaiah who allegedly heeded to the pressure of local leaders as she curbed illegal sand mining in Hassan.

c) Measures to address frequent postings and transfer:

• Civil Service Commission/Board: There is need of independent Civil Service Commission/Board for the purpose of transfers and posting of civil servants. It will reduce political interventions in posting and transfers of civil servants.
• Ethical egoism vs. ethical altruism: The government should balance both needs. Civil servants also have ego needs(ethical egoism) and they cannot merely work on public service motive (ethical altruism)and keep sacrificing their own potential.
• Politics- administration relations: There should be appropriate and healthy relations between political executives and civil servants. This will reduce arbitrary transfers.
• Code of ethics for politicians: There should be Code of ethics for politicians to match with the character of civil servants. There cannot be good administration without good politics.

Reasons:

• When the posting and transfers appear to be politically motivated, it demotivates the honest civil servants.
• It is also recommended by Supreme Court (2011)and ARC-II in its report ‘Ethics in Governance’ that there should be an independent body for promotion and posting.
• It is in the interest of the country that the best minds serve in the administration in key positions.
• On the one hand, the government has introduced lateral entry and Mission Karmayogi to enhance the quality of administration but on the other, those who are in services, are not given adequate opportunity to utilise their potential.

Conclusion:

However, civil servants should uphold the civil service values of service spirit, neutrality, and anonymity all the time. Although there may be arbitrary decisions sometimes related to postings and transfers (which have been also highlighted by ARC-II as a major concern), it should not deter civil servants from working with dedication, commitment and loyalty.

A civil servant is expected to have high level of emotional intelligence and maintain good character. Kautilya say, Dharma is a duty for all. Let Civil Servants do their duty serve people. It is the duty of people to question those who govern if they don’t follow their Dharma.