IAS (CADRE) RULES
Recently, the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) wrote to the States that the Union government proposes to amend Rule 6 (deputation of cadre officers) of the Indian Administrative Service (Cadre) Rules 1954. Under this, the Union government will acquire for itself overriding powers to transfer IAS and IPS officers through Central deputation, doing away with the requirement of taking the approval of the State governments.
What is a cadre?
- Definition: The term ‘cadre’ means the strength of a service or part of a service sanctioned as a separate unit. It is the choice of a State to constitute cadres.
- Exception: The entire service cannot be considered to be a cadre for the purpose of promotion from one post to a higher post in a different grade.
- Rule on deputation: AIS officers are made available for central deputation through a consultative process involving the Centre, the States and the officers concerned.
Proposed Amendments
- Bypassing state government in case of non-cooperation: If the State government delays posting a State cadre officer to the Centre and does not give effect to the Central government’s decision within the specified time, the officer shall stand relieved from cadre from the date as may be specified by the Central government.
- Deciding the number of officers on deputation: The Centre will decide the actual number of officers to be deputed to the Central government in consultation with the State and the latter should make eligible the names of such officers.
- Priority to centre’s decision: In case of any disagreement between the Centre and the State, the matter shall be decided by the Central government and the State shall give effect to the decision of the Centre.
- Deputation for public interest: In specific situations where services of cadre officers are required by the Central government in “public interest,” the State shall give effect to its decisions within a specified time.
Need for amending the cadre rules
- State’s refusal to relieve the officers: Some States used to vindictively withhold the names of some of the officers who had opted for central deputation or delay their relief after they were picked up by the Centre.
- Example: IPS officer Archana Ramasundaram was deputed to the CBI in 2014, but the Tamil Nadu government refused to release her, and suspended her when she defied the state’s order and joined the CBI.
- Politicization of the deputation process: Unfortunately, both the Centre and the States have at times flouted the above healthy conventions for political considerations.
- Example: In May 2021, the Centre unilaterally issued orders for the central deputation of the Chief Secretary of West Bengal just before his last day in service.
- Rising vacancies at central level: On the other hand, Union government was unable to fill vacancies at director and joint secretary level in various Central ministries.
- Example: Around 40% or 390 Central Staffing Scheme (CSS) posts are at joint secretary level and 60% or 540 such posts at the rank of deputy secretary (nine years) or director rank (14 years of service) are lying vacant.
- Shortage of officers: The DoPT said that it is taking this decision in the wake of a shortage of All India Services (AIS) officers in Union Ministries. The Union government was unable to fill vacancies at director and joint secretary levels in various Central ministries.
- Example: According to 2021 data, of the total 6,709 IAS officers in the country, 445 were posted with the Union — only 6.6%.
- State’s reluctance in sponsoring: According to the DoPT, states are not sponsoring an adequate number of officers for Central deputation, and the number of officers is not sufficient to meet the requirement at the Centre.
- Example: Some states used to vindictively withhold the names of some of the officers who had opted for central deputation or delay their relief after they were picked up by the Centre.
Challenges with new amendments
- Against the spirit of cooperative federalism: Pulling the officers from the state whenever the Centre decides to do so may create issues between Centre and states.
- Example: The West Bengal chief secretary was recalled by the Central government hours after the West Bengal chief minister ‘skipped’ a meeting with the Prime Minister.
- Consent of officers neglected: The proposed amendment more or less compels a State government to offer IAS officers for central deputation even when these officers themselves may not wish to go on central deputation.
- Scope for political misuse: New rules may be misused for political considerations.
- Example: The Centre can unilaterally place at its disposal the services of the Chief Secretary, Principal Secretary to CM, and other key officers of a State ruled by a rival party, thereby hampering the smooth administration of states.
- Affects the administration of States: States perceive the proposed amendments as a serious infringement of their rights to deploy IAS officers as they deem best, especially when the cutting edge of policy implementation is mostly at the State level.
- Decline the sheen of All India Services: The contemplated changes have grave implications for the independence, security, and morale of IAS officers.
- Trust deficit issues: If states begin to doubt the loyalty of IAS officers, they are likely to reduce the number of IAS cadre posts and also their annual intake of IAS officers. They may prefer officers of the State Civil Services to handle as many posts as possible.
- Infringement of rights of States: States are right in perceiving the proposed amendments as a serious infringement of their rights to deploy IAS officers as they deem best, especially when the cutting edge of policy implementation is mostly at the State level.
Way Forward
- Concurrence of officers: In the past, certain healthy conventions were generally followed which need to be brought back. Before any officer of the AIS is called for deputation to the Centre, his or her concurrence is required.
- Offer list without discrepancies: Every year, the States need to prepare an “offer list” of officers who had opted for central deputation without arbitrarily withholding any names.
Conclusion
In a federal setup, it is inevitable that differences and disputes would arise between the Centre and the States. But all such quarrels should be resolved in the spirit of cooperative federalism and keeping the larger national interest in mind.