Reforming the IAS Route

The Civil Services results have just been declared, and the photographs and interviews of the successful candidates are being flashed across newspapers, fuelling the civil service dream of millions. It is indeed a great day for those who have made it, and they deserve all the congratulations for their resilience, determination, intelligence, and hard work. At the same time, there are hundreds of thousands who have not succeeded, and they are anxiously wondering about their future. For some, the portals of a life of meaning and purpose have been opened, but for others, it is a depressing moment, and they are feeling lost.

After reading the interviews of the selected candidates, I was surprised to find that most of them had succeeded after several attempts—perhaps even four to five. There was hardly anyone who had made it in the first attempt. This disturbed me. It is true that it is one of the toughest exams, with less than a thousand getting selected out of several lakhs who write the exam. Still, I feel that there should be a much larger percentage of candidates who succeed in the first attempt. When I was selected for the IAS in 1978, there were a significant number of candidates who qualified in the first attempt, and I wonder why this is not happening anymore. The nature of the exam needs to be reviewed to address this anomaly.

When I wrote the IAS and succeeded in the first attempt, I joined the service at the age of 22. This gave me 38 years of working life. Today, with candidates making it after several attempts and getting selected near the age of 30, their career span is considerably shortened to about 30 years. The topmost position in the IAS is that of the Secretary to the Government of India or Chief Secretary in the State. Even today, officers make this grade after serving for about 32–33 years. This means that a large number of current officers, who are getting in at a late age, will never make this grade. It would be ironical if even the candidate who is among the toppers does not reach the highest post in the service because she retires before that. This is not a healthy sign. It can be hugely de-motivating. Further, it can create a feeling among such candidates that there is no point excelling at work because the highest level of the service will not be reached by them. I fear that some may deviate from the desired path and believe in making hay while the sun shines.

I remember that when I got into the IAS, the minimum age for the exam was 21 years for all, and the maximum for general candidates was 26, with the reserved categories getting a couple of years more. Now, I find that though the minimum age remains the same, the maximum age limit for general candidates has been raised to 32, while it is 35 and 37 for the OBCs and SC/STs respectively. This, to my mind, creates a problem, which is further accentuated by the fact that the number of attempts allowed has been exponentially increased. In our time, we were permitted a maximum of three attempts. Today, I find that a general candidate is allowed six attempts, with OBCs getting three more, and it is unlimited in the case of SC/STs. The net result is that young boys and girls keep toiling for the Civil Services exam year after year and spend the best part of their lives doing this. If, at the end of the day, they do not succeed, then they are left in the lurch, with no other rewarding career options available. They become overage for various jobs, and it is perhaps too late for them to acquire a professional degree that would make them employable elsewhere. Their future becomes dark, and they have to look for jobs far below their potential, which frustrates them—and many fall into the grip of depression.

Today, there are a large number of stimulating career options available, and there is no reason why the youth of this country should spend their prime years repeatedly attempting the Civil Services examination. Civil service is not the only route to success in life. Not being able to clear the Civil Services exam is not an indicator of the potential and ability of a person.

Moreover, getting into the Civil Services at a late age presents another problem area. When a person has crossed the age of thirty, his value system and ethical framework have already been formed. It is very difficult to mould him differently. The Civil Services require not only a different aptitude but a completely different mindset and attitude. Service to the people has to be the overriding motivation of a civil servant. I remember joining the IAS at 22, almost fresh from college, full of enthusiasm and the belief that one can change the world. Beyond thirty, there is no denying that a person becomes more worldly-wise and has often seen so much of the realities of the world that there is no place left for unbridled idealism, which, in my opinion, must be the discerning quality of a civil servant.

In light of the above discussion, I am of the firm conviction that the maximum age for the Civil Services should in no case exceed 28 for general candidates, and an exemption of a year or two can be given to the OBCs/SC/STs. Further, the maximum number of attempts allowed to a general candidate should be three, with one additional attempt for the other categories.

Further, I strongly feel that the syllabus for the Civil Services exam needs to be urgently reviewed. The current syllabus is far too exhaustive and expects the candidate to memorise almost everything under the sun. This should be changed because this is one of the main reasons why a candidate has to study for years before he can even think of clearing the exam. For instance, there is no need to have three General Studies papers. Two would be quite sufficient, and they also should have a manageable and defined scope. In addition, the question papers should offer options and not make it mandatory to attempt all questions. There is a fourth General Studies paper on ethics which can be removed. I would be the first person to advocate for the relevance of ethics for civil servants, but having a paper on it in the entrance examination does not help. Ethics should be an important part of the training curriculum at the service academies.

The essay paper should remain, as also one optional subject. However, I feel that the relative weightage of the personality test should be increased. You can now be interviewed in any of the recognized languages, and so there is no elitist bias in this. Moreover, at the prelims stage, in addition to the General Studies papers, the Civil Services Aptitude Test (CSAT) paper should also be added to the score and not be just a qualifying paper. The scheme of the paper can be reviewed to ensure that it does not unduly favour any group.

We need the best to enter the Civil Services. The exam should be such that it makes this happen without making a candidate spend more than five years of his youth preparing for it. The scheme of the exam should be such that it does not deter deserving candidates from having a shot at it. There is a need for an urgent review of the Civil Services exam scheme and pattern.

The writer is an ex-Chief Secretary, Govt of Uttar Pradesh. Views expressed are personal