7A. Principles I held high in service

During my long years in the government, I have never taken things lying down and have always fought to uphold dignity, justice, and the rule of law.

During our training, we learned from our senior colleagues to be fair, just, and lawful in dealing with matters placed before us. I have had a passion for honesty and justice ingrained in my blood since my early years. As a civil servant, I had always tried to act as advised and dictated by my conscience and never allowed any extraneous factor to influence my decision at any stage. All through my service life, I had worked without fear or favour. I had earned the attribute "rigid" for being firm on the rules and regulations.

I did not budge from my rightful stand even when someone in the corridor of powers tried to shake me. I mention here some instances where I did not succumb to the desire of my superiors or disagreed, where necessary, with what they said, even knowing that they could damage my career. These instances include some (not superiors) otherwise close to the power trying to intrude on my field of operation. 

I never worked for personal gains, nor was I after any so-called high-profile posts in my service career. In retrospect, on some occasions, proposals of my appointment to some posts were changed at the final stage in favour of some of my colleagues by political manipulation. Even having ranked first in the WBCS (Executive) Examination and with no question on my sincerity and efficiency[1], I had to spend long years in a far-flung place as Mekliganj, where most others feared to tread. But for the personal intervention of Sri B. C. Sharma, the then Joint Secretary, I could have rotted there for many more years. I could not even secure a posting to a station nearby Calcutta on promotion to the IAS on the first two occasions and had lost four years' seniority in consequence when I could finally join the service on my terms. I could not secure a plot of land in Salt Lake even when I did not have any land or house anywhere in India, while some of my colleagues could do that even after possessing flats or houses in Calcutta. But at the end of the day, I am happy and satisfied that I could function within my defined parameters wherever I had worked.

I loved work, and I did it to my satisfaction. I did not have greed for money or position despite growing up in an environment of wants. As such, I could come out unblemished, even after heading projects worth crores of rupees at different stages of my service career. I could deliver justice without ever being subject to any exterior considerations, political or other.

Today, it pains me to see that most civil servants are working at  the diktat of political masters, right or wrong. They have, as it were, become  His Master's or  Her Majesty’s Voice, always reading the master's mind before giving their views on any matter of public interest. They have forgotten the basic principle of the Civil Service, which requires a civil servant to highlight the provisions of law and give his unbiased views while placing a matter to a political executive. The political master may or may not agree with what the civil servants suggest  and may pass a different order, which becomes binding if in writing. It is for a civil servant to highlight the legal position. It is the prerogative of a political master to accede to it or not. If there was any verbal order not supported by law, the rule provided for getting it reduced to writing before acting on it. If these principles were followed, most of the illegalities and irregularities in decision-making could perhaps be avoided. There would be very few political executives who would like to leave a trail behind their illegal actions. A civil servant has the power to refuse to comply with a verbal order if illegal. In the past, there were civil servants like K. K. Hazra, Raghu Banerjee, JC Sengupta, S M Murshed, who could refuse to comply with the orders, not in accordance with the law straight in the face of their political masters of the stature of even Dr. B. C. Roy. While it is true that such a breed of civil servants is rare now, it is also a fact that the political masters today are mostly vindictive towards those not conforming to their wishes. (A novel way to shunt off officers, not dancing to the tune of masters, to compulsory waiting, not a respectful position, is being taken recourse to as a policy in West Bengal for a decade or so.) The backbone of the civil services has been shattered over the years by persistent political interference and the inability of the civil servants to resist that. The self-serving civil servants who now form the majority have taken advantage of the situation to turn things in their favour. The other band of the civil servants not guided by self-interest have mostly lacked the courage to act in the way they should have. Only a handful have tried to go against the tide and resist. They have suffered. It is ominous for the future. Unfortunately for the country, civil servants today are, by and large, either malleable or self-serving.

It shows us a glimmer of hope when civil servants like Durgashakti Nagpal and Asoke Khemka of recent origin  (2015-16), stand up to enforce the law in the face of the stiff opposition of the political hoodlums and their mentors. It shows the civil servants can stop the rot if they wish. True, the days have changed, and there are nexuses of various kinds acting against the public interest, yet the civil servants could save the disaster if they wake up as a class. To do this, the civil servants need only be honest, upright, fearless, and law-abiding. They should, as a class, refuse to play at the hands of the politicians and act strictly with honesty, integrity, and according to the code of conduct. A shake-up of the system and a change in the attitude of the Society could make this happen. Service associations could possibly play a positive role in motivating their members to act according to law and justice. It could be a wishful thinking, but then, what is the alternative?

 It has recently come in the news that Ashok Khemka has not been empanelled for Joint Secretary posts in the Govt. of India, though he has attained the seniority. The reason highlighted is he had never been on central deputation in his service career.

It tempts me to mention an instance dating back a few years to show how a self-serving officer processed a matter at the West Bengal Secretariat of the L & LR Department. A Joint Secretary level officer had written in a departmental note, without an in-depth examination of materials placed before him and without giving his observation point by point on facts stated therein (which points the joint secy brushed aside as irrelevant ‘internal matter of the District Level officer's  office, etc.) by a district level officer of that department in a matter involving a court case as, “the officer (meaning the district level officer who had raised the points) has given his opinion as a law officer without trying himself to explore if there is still any scope for getting the appeal admitted.” He wrote this against the common knowledge that there is no provision for filing an appeal against a court order months after the order was complied with. The DLO had mentioned it, too, in his letter, to which Jt Secy had made the observation. To said Jt Secy, as his note implies, government officers were not to take the rightful position as the law demands but to distort facts to the advantage of those interested. The Jt Secy even lied while saying that he had discussed the matter with the district-level officer with the intent to establish his views.  The matter smacked of corruption, but by his mishandling, with or without intent, it missed that angle. A breed of such officers was still there decades back; only the numbers are increasing. The concerned Jt Secy was suitably remunerated post- and pre-retirement. This breed of officers goes beyond rules to please their superiors and make themselves appear efficient.