Dilip Cherian | Rethink urgently how to fill huge number of civil service vacancies
India faces a severe shortage of IAS, IPS, and IFoS officers, straining administrative efficiency and law enforcement capabilities. As of January 2024, data from the department of personnel and training (DoPT) reveals a 19 per cent shortfall in IAS officers, with 5,542 in service against a sanctioned strength of 6,858. Similarly, the IPS cadre has 4,469 officers against a requirement of 5,055, leaving an 11 per cent gap. The IFoS faces an even sharper deficit of 33 per cent, with only 2,151 officers in place compared to a sanctioned strength of 3,193. These shortages force officers to manage multiple departments and responsibilities, overburdening them and potentially affecting governance quality. State-level data highlights significant disparities. Uttar Pradesh has the highest IAS vacancies for direct recruits (63), while Bihar leads in promotee shortfalls (79). For IPS officers, Madhya Pradesh faces the largest gap among direct recruits (43) and Odisha leads in promotee vacancies (59). The IFoS shows similar trends, with the AGMUT cadre having the most vacancies (105).
Recruitment through the annual UPSC civil services examination has not kept pace with the growing gaps. Officials suggest faster promotions from feeder cadres as one solution. Lateral recruitment, already adopted for some central roles, is another option, though it presents challenges in training entrants for specialised administrative or law enforcement roles.
Policymakers must also rethink how IAS and IPS officers are deployed. Certain roles in domains like statistics, economic affairs, and intelligence could be filled by domain experts, drawing on specialised talent from diverse fields. Addressing these vacancies requires urgent and innovative strategies to ensure India's governance structures remain robust and effective.
High-stakes clash in Kerala’s babudom
The babu spat in Kerala, reported by DKB last week, is intensifying. In a rare and bold move, IAS officer N. Prasanth (2007 batch, Kerala cadre) has openly challenged his senior colleagues, alleging serious misconduct that could have far-reaching consequences for the integrity of India’s administrative framework. Mr Prasanth, currently under suspension, has issued a legal notice accusing Kerala chief secretary Sarada Muraleedharan, additional chief secretary A. Jayathilak, industries director K. Gopalakrishnan and a leading state newspaper of document fabrication and criminal conspiracy.
At the heart of the dispute lies an ex parte inquiry led by Mr Jayathilak, which accused Mr Prasanth of misplacing official files and irregular attendance during his tenure as CEO of Unnathi. According to the legal notice, this inquiry lacked government authorisation and relied on fabricated letters uploaded to the government’s eOffice system. Mr Prasanth claims these documents, allegedly signed by Mr Gopalakrishnan, were hurriedly manipulated in August 2023 before being removed from departmental records.
The legal notice further alleges that despite being formally informed of these irregularities on November 14, 2024, the chief secretary failed to act, effectively enabling continued manipulation of government records. Prasanth has demanded a public apology from the accused and called for a thorough inquiry into the actions of Mr Jayathilak and Mr Gopalakrishnan.
This episode exposes deep fissures within the bureaucracy and raises pressing questions about governance and accountability. When senior officers are accused of such grave misconduct, the very foundations of administrative integrity come into question. If proven, the allegations could set a dangerous precedent, undermining public trust in government institutions.
The Prasanth case is a wake-up call for systemic reforms to protect whistleblowers within the civil service while ensuring accountability at all levels. The spotlight is now on how Kerala’s administration will address these explosive claims.
Politics of power: Why UP’s acting DGP may stay just that
Prashant Kumar, Uttar Pradesh’s acting DGP, might be learning the hard way that in Yogi-Modi land, the word “acting” in a job title can take on a life of its own. A 1990-batch IPS officer, Mr Kumar has been donning the “acting” badge since January this year, hoping to drop the qualifier and make things official. But alas, apparently the political winds are blowing in a different direction.
Early last month, when the Yogi Adityanath government unveiled its shiny new rules for appointing a full-time DGP, chatter in babu circles suggested Mr Kumar was a shoo-in. After all, he had been holding the fort for nearly a year. But in an abrupt twist, Mr Kumar’s name has been quietly nudged off the contenders’ list, sources have informed DKB.
Here is the rub: Under the revised rules, only those IPS officers with at least six months left in service qualify for the top job. Mr Kumar, set to retire in May 2025, does not fit the timeline — unless someone pulled some bureaucratic strings to extend his service by a good 18 months. That, however, would require the Centre’s blessings, and the Yogi government has no appetite for such complications.
So, Mr Kumar remains the “acting” DGP. Whether this is an oversight or a calculated sidestep in the complex dance of Yogi-Modi politics, one thing is clear: Sometimes, in the corridors of power, even being in the race is a privilege that can be snatched away before the finish line is in sight.
