REWIND

New Delhi, 5 February 2026

WEST BENGAL POLL: FACTS & FICTION

By Inder Jit

(Released on 16 March 1982) 

Fiction appears to be playing havoc with facts over the West Bengal poll and, more specifically, over the electoral rolls. Confusion has been worse confounded by all manner of charges by the leaders of various political parties --- and the Calcutta High Court's stay on the publication of final rolls by the Election Commission. Over two months back, the Prime Minister said in a public speech in West Bengal that 30 per cent of the State's rolls were fudged. On March 1, the Prime Minister repeated her allegation in the Lok Sabha though she worded it discreetly as the President's address, Mrs Gandhi said that all political parties had been demanding that the electoral rolls should reflect the "correct position" and added that to ask for this, according to the twisted logic of some people, was anti-democratic. West Bengal's Chief Minister, Mr Jyoti Basu, asserted on March 11 that the Centre had hatched a "conspiracy" to delay the poll and somehow bring the State under President's rule. 

Many independent observers in West Bengal support the CPM's view, as a brief visit to Calcutta early in February showed. One top commentator said: "The CPM is sure to romp home unless the Congress (I) succeeds in delaying the poll and rigging the rolls." A prominent State Congress (I) leader told me in Calcutta Club: "Take it from me, there will be no Assembly election this year. Our State will go to the polls only in February 1983!" How? Pat came the reply: "Our leaders know what to do -- and how." This was a few days before the rolls issue was taken to Calcutta High Court and Mr Justice Sabyasachi Mukherji gave the stay order. The stay has since been vacated by the Supreme Court. But the basic issue remains: What is the truth? Has the Election Commission, which is charged with the responsibility of conducting all elections to Parliament and the State legislatures, sinned? Has the CPM had its way in West Bengal? Or is the Commission more sinned against than sinning? Is the faction-ridden Congress (I) in West Bengal trying to make the Commission a scapegoat for its own lapses?

My enquiries have yielded a fund of interesting information. More than anything else, the record has been put in perspective by the Commission in its 35-page affidavit filed before the Supreme Court. Since the general elections to the Assemblies of Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and West Bengal were normally due this year, the Commission ordered on December 12, 1980 that the rolls in the three States be "thoroughly and intensively revised" with reference to the qualifying date of January 1, 1981. In West Bengal, this programme commenced for some constituencies in January, others in April, and some in July and was completed on December 31, 1981. The detailed programme of this intensive revision was given wide publicity through mass media and unprecedented advertisements in newspapers. Simultaneously, detailed communications were sent by the State Chief Electoral Officer from time to time to various political parties. As a special case, two copies of the electoral rolls of 1980, then in force, were supplied to recognised political parties in January 1981 to secure their co-operation in the revision of rolls.

In accordance with the directions issued by the Election Commission and the Chief Electoral Officer, there was house to house enumeration of electors. Electoral cards containing the names of eligible persons as furnished by each household were signed by the head of the family or any other senior member present at the time of enumeration and also by the enumerator. One copy of the electoral card was handed over to each household and the duplicate retained in the offices of the Electoral Registration Officers. This process was adopted to ensure that all the eligible names in the household were entered in the card. On the basis of these cards, manuscripts were prepared and draft electoral rolls printed and published for 274 Assembly constituencies on September 7 and for the remaining 20 Assembly constituencies on October 22, 1991. Claims and objections were invited giving 21 days time for the purpose in accordance with the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. The rolls were made available for inspection by the public in every polling area covered by every part of the electoral roll.

Two copies of the printed draft electoral roll for each constituency after house to house enumeration were supplied to the political parties and claims and objections invited. The rolls were finally published on December 31, 1981. These showed that the claims and objections filed and those accepted and rejected in respect of 284 Assembly constituencies out of a total of 294 were as follows: claims filed in Form 6 totalled 3,98,518 of which 2,88,462 were admitted. Objections filed in Form 7 totalled 1,09,148 of which 64,938 were allowed. West Bengal had an electorate of about 3 crores in 1981. Thus, the valid claims in prescribed forms accepted for inclusion were less than one per cent and valid objections less than 0.2 per cent. This very low percentage pales into insignificance when one takes into account the lapse of nearly 8 months after house to house enumeration. Deaths, absenteeism and shifting of population would have occurred requiring rectification.

The Election Commission could have held the poll on the basis of the 1981 rolls. (The statutory obligation is to revise the electoral rolls once before every general election, This was duly done and the final electoral rolls published on December 31, 1981) But the Commission, in keeping with its own decision to go in for summary revision in the entire country with reference to January 1 of that year as the qualifying date, went in for a summary revision in 1982 with January 1 as the qualifying date. (Summary revision enables persons who have attained 21 years of age to enrol themselves in accordance with the latest qualifying date.) Thus, the electoral rolls in force were adopted as the draft electoral rolls and were published on January 1, 1982 under Rule 10 of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. Sixteen days' time i.e. from January 1 to 16 was allowed for filing claims for inclusion of names, objections to inclusion of names and objection to particulars of an entry,

The total number of claims and objections filed from January 1 to 16, 1982 in respect of 268 Assembly constituencies of which figures were available showed the following position: Claims for inclusion totalled 3,75,197 of which 24,592 were accepted; objections to the inclusion of names totalled 1,56,460 of which 72,569 were accepted; and objections to particulars in any entry in Form 8 totalled 85,042 of which 62,389 were accepted. Thus, the total number of valid claims for inclusions accepted worked out to about 0.82 per cent of the total electorate of a crores and the valid objections to about 0.24 per cent. At one stage, some Congress (I) leaders complained to the commission that the required forms were not available. The Commission promptly responded and printed these forms widely in West Bengal newspapers and invited voters to copy them, assuring that all such typed or hand-written forms would be accepted.

Some top Congress (I) and Congress (s) leaders from West Bengal -- Mr Anand Gopal Mukherjee, Mr Ajit Panja and Mr P.R. Das Munshi -- met the Chief Election Commissioner, Mr Shakdher, on January 8 and 15 and orally represented that the rolls revised suffered from irregularities. They were advised to file complaints on or before January 16 before the Electoral Registration Officers in the prescribed forms. Mr Shakdher also clarified that in case these claims and objections were not dealt with in accordance with the law they might bring specific cases to the notice of the Chief Electoral Officer and the Commission. Written replies to this effect were sent to Mr Ashok Sen and two others. A large number of omnibus complaints were thereafter presented to the Commission, which directed that these be filed also before the Electoral Registration Officers and the Chief Electoral Officer. It was made clear that no complaint received after January 16, 1982 would be entertained. The Commission then received many representations urging it to send a team of officers to enquire into the complaints as the Electoral Registration Officers and others were not dealing with them in accordance with the law.

A team of officers visited the State and made on-the-spot verification for sample survey of the revision of electoral rolls. They also examined in detail various basic records relating to the revision of electoral rolls in 1981 and 1982, especially with reference to the investigations made into the omnibus complaints given to the Electoral Registration Officers by the complainants. The team submitted its report to the Commission which held that there was no justification for undertaking any de novo revision of the rolls as demanded. The percentage of errors was found to be below normal. Interestingly, at no stage did the Commission receive 8 lakh claims and objections in the prescribed forms. The omnibus complaints were received in the form of lists, some without having even minimum particulars for any possible action. There was "complete lack of particulars in a majority of cases", according to the Commission, and "many of the lists had not even been signed by the complainants." Despite these large-scale infirmities, the Commission showed indulgence and asked the Electoral Registration Officers to look into these complaints under their suo moto powers.

To end a long story, the Election Commission appears to have acted without fear or favour. Of significance in the present context are some recent happenings in Haryana, where the former Chief Minister, Mr Devi Lal, made specific allegations of rigging of the electoral rolls by the present Congress (I) Government in some constituencies, including that of the Chief Minister, Mr Bhajan Lal. The Election Commission thereupon made an on-the-spot enquiry and, on a test check, found the allegations to be correct. A revision of the rolls was ordered. Subsequently, one officer was removed when complaints were received that some officers were working along political lines. In the final analysis, the West Bengal poll raises a basic issue of crucial importance to the future of our democracy. Parliamentary democracy carries public disputes from the streets into the chamber for debate and decision. The ballot substitutes the bullet. Every care, therefore, needs to be taken to ensure that nothing is done that may constrain the people in West Bengal to give up the ballot and take to the streets.---INFA

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Round The World

New Delhi, 6 February 2026

India’s Trade Deals

New Delhi to Cautiously Tread!

By Dr. D.K. Giri

(Prof of Practice, NIIS Group of Institutions) 

India concluded successfully the negotiations on a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with European Union about a week ago. This was called “the mother of trade deals”. Again a couple of days ago, India signed a trade deal, though not FTA, with the United States, which is called the ‘father of all deals’. While both the deals mark a significant achievement for economic diplomacy of all the three contracting parties – India, the European Union and the United States – it is necessary for New Delhi to tread carefully on securing the commitments and expectations embedded in these two trade deals. 

Why the trade deals in reference are significant for all the parties? The FTA with European Union should be hailed as a success simply because it could be concluded. Remember, the negotiations between India and the European Union lasted about two decades, beginning in 2007. The talks got stalled in 2013 and were seriously resumed in 2022. They were equally quickly concluded in January 2026. The concluding summit between India and the European Union was preceded by the state visit of two top leaders of the Union, the President of the Council, Antonio Costa and the President of the Commission, Ursula von der Leyen. Their visit was preceded again by the Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany, the most powerful economy of the European Union. 

The main driver for the conclusion of FTA negotiation is said to be the American President Donald Trump. His disrupting style in conducting American foreign policy has prompted many countries for economic and geo-political realignment. Trump’s focus on MAGA – Making American Great Again – has ironically led his country to withdrawal and isolation. Trump withdrew from 66 international affiliations and diluted the most powerful security alliance, NATO which nudged the European Union to look for new allies and fresh initiatives in their economic and security policies. Such a shift in European Union’s strategic thinking led them closer to India resulting in the signing of the FTA. 

The trade deal with the United States is significant as the bilateral relations between both the countries had nosedived in Trump’s second term, for various reasons. This downward development was a matter of worry for both Americans and Indians. A relationship which was steadily built over two decades was being torpedoed by Trump by his temperamental behaviour. The main grudge Trump was carrying was born out of New Delhi buying Russian oil despite Moscow continuing to militarily pound Ukraine after an outright invasion four years ago. 

Whatever may have been the triggers for these trade deals, they are certainly solid foundations for taking the ties forward. Taking into account criticism of the deals, which are expected in any democracy, it is in order that we analyse these deals and sound caution to each signatory to make them work for the benefit of all stakeholders, not just for domestic political constituencies in each country. From my studies of India and European Union bilateralism since the Union began as European Economic Community in 1957, there were both structural impediments as well as operational issues which stemmed the growth of the ties. 

On structural issues, both European Union and the Union of India suffered from a mismatch between their economic and political aspirations in their foreign policies. The European Union was mainly driven by their economic interest whereas India by political priorities. This seems to be changing as it should. The major reflection of this mismatch was EU’s growing trade with China and New Delhi’s pivot to USSR now Russia in lieu of the West – America and Europe. 

On operational issues, India was consistently unable to meet the delivery commitments. In 1980s, European Economic Community had introduced a quota system for its various imports like textiles, garments, mangoes and so on. Indian exporters were not able to utilise the quota allotted to them. Again things might have changed. The other drawback Indian exports suffered from, was the quality. European standards are quite high in international market. In order to secure their standards, they used a Non-Tariff Barriers (NTBs). Since India’s international trade has been receiving a renewed focus by all political regimes, the quality should have improved. But the best way to maintain export quality is to demand quality products for domestic market and consumption. 

Thankfully, both India and European Union are pursuing assertive foreign policies, especially in breaking the mould of international politics which was marked by bipolar competition. It was between USA and USSR after the Second World War through the Cold War until the disintegration of Soviet Union in 1992. Then, during the period of globalisation, it was USA and Sino-Russian axis. This is when Union of India and the European Union are seeking and striving for a multipolar world with multiple power points. I have been critical of this approach, treating it as a utopia not born by history. But, with Trump disrupting international economy and politics in a big way, a new geo-political system may not be ruled out. 

On the US-India trade deal, it gives a strategic boost for bilateral ties. United States reduces tariffs on Indian goods from 50 per cent to 18 per cent, at least a 1 per cent lower than ASEAN competitors of India. India commits to import 100b USD worth of US goods annually for five years in energy products, aircraft, technology and agricultural goods. This seems a tall order as US exports of goods to India were roughly 42b USD in 2024. The structural bottlenecks, regulatory frictions, and sectoral constraints will likely to limit how quickly trade volumes can increase. 

Secondly, China still looms over the bilateral equation between India and USA. Donald Trump has been seen courting both China and Pakistan in recent times. This will not secure the confidence of Indians. Third, Donald Trump remains as an unpredictable as ever. Indian leadership had decided to wait out Trump’s second term as was indicated by India’s NSA Ajit Doval to the Secretary of State, Mark Rubio. 

At any rate, the trade deal is portrayed as bearing rich potential for geo-political dividends. This could be seen in India’s energy security, strategic realignment – strengthening Quad and India emerging as a reliable sourcing partner reducing US dependence on China and reshaping the balance of power in Asia. Handled carefully the deal’s impact could extend beyond trade, enhancing India-US strategic partnership and promoting global stability. As of now, the deal reflects India’s growing economic and geo-political importance with potential long-term implications for regional stability and global trade dynamics. All these will depend on New Delhi treading cautiously and dealing with Trump quite carefully.---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Open Forum

New Delhi, 4 February 2026

Budget & Common Man

NO BENEFITS REALISED

By Dhurjati Mukherjee

 The annual Union Budget has failed to generate excitement among ordinary citizens; their main concern is a potential increase in prices. In contrast, those in the higher social strata pay close attention to what advantages they might gain for their businesses in the coming financial year. 

Note some basic facts: the top 10% owning 65% of India’s wealth and the top 1% about 40% while the bottom half owning just 6.4%. “Four out of five Indians subsist on less than Rs 200 per day but one subsists on less than Rs 100 a day. Net household financial savings are at a five-decade low of 5.2% while household debt is sharply up to 41% from 35% in 2019,” as per opposition Congress recent report on the economy.     

During her budget presentation, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman identified three primary kartavyas (duties) for the government: accelerating and sustaining economic growth, addressing aspirations of people, and building capacities by ensuring equitable access to resources for all families, communities, sectors, and regions. While these objectives were articulated in broad terms, a closer look at the budget offered few targeted measures for the common citizen, small-scale farmers, or traders, with a clear emphasis placed on bolstering manufacturing and industrial sectors. 

Stakeholders anticipated more definitive announcements on key issues such as comprehensive electrification and affordable housing initiatives. The impact on employment generation remains to be seen as the year progresses. Nonetheless, commendable steps have been taken to promote skill development, support the electronics and IT textiles industries, and enhance value addition in agriculture. 

The government has allocated Rs 10,000 crore each for an SME growth fund and container manufacturing over five years. Other initiatives include textile expansion, upgradation, and programmes for weavers and artisans, along with mega textile parks to boost value addition. These efforts aim to create jobs for engineers and skilled technicians, though their impact will only be clear in the next fiscal year. 

There has, however, been an emphasis on infrastructure development which includes establishing seven high-speed rail corridors with an allocation of Rs 5000 crore over five years – benefitting mainly the southern states and Maharashtra -- and a freight corridor from Dankuni to Surat as well as developing industrial corridors in some cities in Odisha.  But the question is why are there just industrial corridors in one state?   

In a move at attracting private investment, the capital expenditure outlay has been pegged at Rs 12.2 lakh crore in FY27 against Rs 11.2 lakh crore in the current fiscal with heightened focus on Tier-II and Tier-III cities and temple towns with an outlay which is welcome. But as per reports of 15^th Finance Commission, which will end in March, Rs 8000 crore allotted for a performance-based challenge fund to develop eight new cities has remained unutilized in the last five years. Will the government fulfil the promised allocation and ensure states utilize the funds judiciously? 

Technology is being prioritised, with AI and robotics highlighted. The second phase of semiconductor manufacturing will receive Rs 10,000 crore, while electronics manufacturing under PLI gets Rs 40,000 crore and new high-tech tool rooms aim to boost capital goods. Mobile phone production increased 146%. Proposed rare earth corridors in southern India and Odisha target import substitution and may generate jobs for engineers and computer scientists. 

A five-year Rs 10,000 crore programme has been allocated to the biopharma sector under Biopharma SHAKTI to develop India into a global manufacturing hub. Additionally, a NIMHANS-II in Ranchi focused on mental health and trauma care is proposed, though more centers could be considered. The government’s emphasis remains on Ayurveda, with three national institutes and upgraded pharmacies proposed, alongside plans to export Ayurveda products. 

In the health sector, while reducing the prices of 17 cancer drugs and easing import restrictions for rare disease treatments, alongside promoting medical tourism, provide some benefits, these measures do not sufficiently address the needs of lower-income segments, who lack access to an adequate healthcare system and must often travel significant distances for specialised care. In a densely populated country such as India, rural and underdeveloped districts require targeted attention, and question remains whether 50-100 specialty hospitals would be established within the next three to five years. Furthermore, the Health Mission’s allocation of Rs 39,390 crore towards strengthening primary healthcare, maternal and child health services, and disease control programmes remains significantly below actual requirements. 

Although the budget allocation of Rs 1.06 lakh crore represents a 10% increase over the revised estimates for the current financial year, it may appear optimistic. However, it raises questions about whether this amount is truly sufficient to meet the needs of disadvantaged and marginalised groups who lack access to affordable healthcare. As anticipated, the PM Ayushman Bharat Health Infrastructure Mission was allotted over Rs 64,000 crore. 

In the education sector, the plan to establish five university townships in industrial hubs, each with universities, colleges, and skill centres, is notable. While a girls’ hostel is proposed in every district, including a college alongside it would have been beneficial. The initiatives for data centre hubs and vocational training are positive steps. Since education is on the concurrent list, the Centre is responsible for providing quality educational facilities in select districts to support disadvantaged students. However, there has been no announcement of increased research grants for universities, and an 8% rise in funding to Rs 1.39 lakh crore for 2025-26 appears insufficient considering market inflation.     

Regarding agriculture, the finance minister announced measures aimed at increasing farmers' income, including targeted support for high-value crops in coastal regions and the North-East, with a particular focus on coconuts, sandalwood, cashew, and cocoa. An allocation of Rs 350 crore has been made for this initiative. The importance of fisheries and animal husbandry was also highlighted, given their contribution of 38% to agriculture's gross value added; these sectors are expected to be further developed, although the impact may not extend to small fishery owners. 

The new technologies would primarily benefit large-scale farmers, without providing further details. Notably, there was an unexpected reduction in fertiliser subsidies. Meanwhile, the Krishonnati Yojana under Agriculture Ministry received an allocation of Rs 11,200 crore, representing a 40% increase from Rs 8,000 crore in 2025-26, despite the overall ministry budget remaining largely unchanged. 

It should be noted that certain regions and states require increased productivity, and while many expected the government to address this issue, no statements were made on the topic. In addition, water shortages are worsening, making it important for the government to propose strategies for encouraging dryland farming in affected areas, but these measures were not outlined. There is also mention of a new initiative called SHE Mart (Self-Help Entrepreneur Mart), intended to help boost farmers' incomes, yet details about this program were lacking. 

The budget could be seen as pro-elite, with measures like cheaper foreign education, reduced duties on imported household goods, and risk funds favouring lenders. Incentives mainly benefit businesses, while the middle class faces higher iron and steel prices and a lack of affordable housing initiatives. Although touted as “youth-driven,” the budget lacks clear plans for job creation to support the younger generation. More needs to be spelt out. ---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Political Diary

New Delhi, 3 February 2026

Calamity Country

India’s Governance Crisis

By Poonam I Kaushish 

As the Budget rolled out and Government patted itself on 7.5 GDP, a key question remained unanswered:  Have we become the calamity country of the world? It seems so as we lurch from one catastrophe to another, whereby the death toll from disasters keeps rising, but alarm bells are seldom triggered loud enough for our ‘deaf’ authorities to take timely and preventive actions.

Take the devastating fire that ripped through two adjoining warehouses on Kolkata’s outskirts leaving 29 dead and counting. Instead of finding out who was negligent or bribed, BJP-TMC buried answerability by playing gulli-danda. Accused Union Home Minster, “Whose money is it? Why no arrestes? Replied TMC, “Not possible to check private warehouses.” Understandable, as  high stakes State elections is round the corner and raj gaddi is up for grabs.

Or, the horrific fire at a Goa nightclub which left 25 dead December. Turns out it was built illegally on salt pan and operated without licence. A magisterial inquiry noted serious lapses and collusion at multiple official levels but no one was held accountable, only owners were  arrested.

Earlier, over 89 patients died in a Kolkata hospital. Predictably, the hospital’s licence was cancelled and Chief Minister vowed “harshest punishment” for those found responsible, read owners arrest. But was mum on mandatory fire checks?   

The NCRB data shows over 1.5 lakh fire incidents annually, resulting in above 27,000 deaths, the most vulnerable victims being children. The frightening part? More than 57%  deaths occur in residential settings, with most occurring at night when occupants are asleep and reaction time is slow.

Less said the better of lakhs of lives lost annually due to faulty infrastructural planning. Consider road accidents which are overwhelming. India recorded 4.73 lakh road accidents resulting in around 1.70 lakh deaths or 11% even as we have only one per cent vehicles last year. Sic.

An example: Last month a Delhi couple bled to death after remaining trapped for 8 hours inside their mangled WagonR which was hit by an unidentified heavy vehicle on the Delhi-Mumbai expressway. Cars whizzed past but no one stopped to help. By the time they were taken to hospital they were dead from blood loss, which could have been prevented had they been taken to hospital on time.

Shockingly, despite the psychological trauma victims and their families suffer, Government has yet to come up with a single sustained campaign on the pressing need for road safety. Ditto vis-à-vis deaths from fire, where we have no pan-India safety campaign to help prevent accidents.

Pertinently, the chronology of these tragedies follows a familiar pattern. Rather than focus on strictness of daily governance, priority is given to optics of political grandstanding, of Viksit Bharat by 2047.

Indore, celebrated as India's cleanest city faced a deplorable public health emergency last month as contaminated drinking water caused by sewage leakage triggered diarrhoea and vomiting outbreak. Multiple lives were lost and hundreds took ill. But other than tall talk of taking action against civic authorities passing-the-file from one department to another played out as State protocols for water safety monitoring were washed out.

Besides, Government sorely lacks crowd management skills. Police were completely overwhelmed at actor-politician Vijay rally in Tamil Nadu September which left 45 dead and dozens injured, underscoring public safety is given least priority. Again jubilation turned to horror in Bengaluru as a massive crowd gathered at a stadium to celebrate Royal Challenger’s first IPL title killing many.

Remember, media blitz of Maha Kumbh Mela Prayagraj last year. Of 50 million pilgrims, but  Administration shrouded 200 dead and scores injured. A month later, over-crowding erupted in stampede at New Delhi Railway Station, killing 40 and injuring many.  Both underplayed. If chaos is made light of how can corrective measures be taken?

Be it road, rail or air accidents or a stampede. Each time it’s a classic case of too little too late. Why? Who will be held accountable? Questionably, will babus have courage to correct themselves? Can competence and integrity, not allegiance become criteria for selection?

Its open secret those in positions of power, specially the powerful bureaucracy lobby are the first to shrug off their responsibility. An obscurantist force often rivaling politicians with its fair share of crooks, criminals and cheats. A majority of who work on the dictum, show me the face I will show you the rule. Which translates into grease my palms else I will read you the riot act and how!

Add to this, States are notorious for having a “committed bureaucracy” or being aligned to Parties, resulting in a spate of transfers and hounding out following a political change.  Every change of guard leads to ad nauseum transfers resulting in most officials taking no initiative.

Indeed, the political identification of officials is becoming so marked that even bureaucrats are able to predict who will occupy which top post, if ‘X’, ‘Y’ or ‘Z’ Party or individual comes to power! Confessed a former Cabinet Secretary, “the problem is endemic in States like UP, Bihar and Tamil Nadu, where Chief Ministers have failed to draw a distinction between “political direction and political interference.”

Chimed in another, “Bureaucrats were to be checks in the system. The checks have turned into cheques while the balance is out of the window! The civil service has become an elite self perpetuating club which protects its perks, turf and corners all top jobs. Adeptly they have created jobs like regulators and committees, cornered by them alongside misusing their office to benefit a Party or cultivate certain constituencies while in office.”

Worse, instead of putting the right man in the right job, netas invariably end up choosing a wrong man for the right job for the wrong reasons. Brining matters to such a pass that caste, corruption, pliability and political connections alone count when it comes to promotions. Thus, administration become increasingly weak and arbitrary since there is no time to acquire even minimum knowledge necessary for discharge of functions.

Even late Prime Minister Manmohan Singh confessed: “I am disgusted with the system”, when he discovered even Cabinet decisions remained where they were taken --- on paper. Perhaps, file-pushers had to apply their heads to arrive at an agreed conclusion as to who should push the file. And on who’s orders? Cabinet, Minister or political mai baap?

Undeniably, we are in the throes of governance crisis. Primarily, as our bureaucracy is designed for stability and control, not citizen-driven accountability.  Two, due to job security without performance pressure, penalzing an officer is extremely difficult and slow. Three, departmental enquiries takes years between vigilance bodies, courts so the time action happens the officer may have retired. Four, weak performance metrics whereby promotions are seniority-based rather than result oriented.

The writing is on the wall. Babudom must give serious thought to determining what action needs to be taken collectively to remove administrative deficiencies, expose political malfunctioning and restore the system. One way is to internalize US’s zero tolerance principle and the “sunset principle.” Under this method, justification for any Governmental activity is all time under scrutiny that no acts of misdemeanour take place.

If our bureaucrats don’t change, a time will come when they will become increasingly irrelevant. Will Babudom rise to the occasion? Or will they allow the steel frame to rot and rust as they revel in non-governance and zero accountability?  --- INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)