During the East India Company period, the civil services were classified into three – covenanted, uncovenanted and special civil services. The covenanted civil service, or the Honourable East India Company's Civil Service (HEICCS), as it was called, largely comprised civil servants occupying the senior posts in the government.[4][6][7] The uncovenanted civil service was introduced solely to facilitate the entry of Indians onto the lower rung of the administration.[6][7][8] The special service comprised specialised departments, such as the Indian Forest Service, the Imperial Police and the Indian Political Service, whose ranks were drawn from either the covenanted civil service or the Indian Army. The Imperial Police included many Indian Army officers among its members, although after 1893 an annual exam was used to select its officers.[8][7] In 1858 the HEICCS was replaced by the Indian Civil Service (ICS),[6][7] which became the highest civil service in India between 1858 and 1947. The last appointments to the ICS were made in 1942.[7][8]
There is no alternative to this administrative system... The Union will go, you will not have a united India if you do not have good All-India Service which has the independence to speak out its mind, which has [the] sense of security that you will standby [sic] your work... If you do not adopt this course, then do not follow the present Constitution. Substitute something else... these people are the instrument. Remove them and I see nothing but a picture of chaos all over the country.
A special cadre was created in 1954 to administer NEFA (present day Arunachal Pradesh) and for later all North Eastern Region. It was first mooted by then Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru.[21]
There are three modes of recruitment into the Indian Administrative Service. IAS officers may enter the IAS by passing the Civil Services Examination, which is conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC).[3] Officers recruited this way are called direct recruits. Some IAS officers are also recruited from the state civil services,[3] and, in rare cases, selected from non-state civil service.[3] The ratio between direct recruits and promotees is fixed at 2:1. All IAS officers, regardless of the mode of entry, are appointed by the President of India.[18]
Only about 180 candidates out of over 1million applicants, who apply through CSE, are successful, a success rate of less than 0.02percent.
[10][22][23][24]
Unlike candidates appointed to other civil services, a successful IAS candidate is rendered ineligible to retake CSE.[25] From 1951 to 1978, an IAS candidate was required to submit two additional papers, as well as three optional papers (instead of two as with other civil services) to be eligible for the Indian Administrative Service or the Indian Foreign Service. The two additional papers were postgraduate level submissions, compared to the graduate level of the optional papers, and it was this distinction that resulted in a higher status for the IAS and IFS. The two postgraduate level submissions were later removed, but this has not changed the perceived higher status of the IAS and IFS.[26][27] After the selection process, the successful candidates undergo training at the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration in Mussoorie, Uttarakhand.[11]
State cadres
Cadre allocation policy
The central government announced a new cadre allocation policy for the All India Services in August 2017, touting it as a policy to ensure national integration of the bureaucracy and to ensure an All India character of the services.[28][29][30] The existing twenty O sixcadres were to be divided into fivezones by the Department of Personnel and Training.[31][32][33][34] Under the new policy, a candidate first selects their zones of preference, in descending order, then indicates a cadre preference from each preferred zone. The candidate indicates their second cadre preference for every preferred zone subsequently. The preference for the zones and cadres remains in the same order and no change is permitted.[28][29][30]
Until 2008, there was no formal system that permitted the selection of a state cadre preferred by the candidate. If the candidate was not placed in a vacancy in their home state, they would be allocated to other states, which were selected from a roster in alphabetic order, starting from 'a', 'h', 'm' or 't', depending on the year. For example, if in a particular year the roster begins from 'a', then the first candidate on the roster will go to the Andhra Pradesh state cadre, the next one to Bihar, and then to Chhattisgarh, Gujarat and so on in alphabetical order.[36] The next year the roster starts from 'h', for either Haryana or Himachal Pradesh (the two states alternate roster years). This system, practised since the mid-1980s, ensured that officers from different states were placed all over India.
The system of permanent state cadres resulted in wide disparities of professional exposure for officers when comparing those from developed versus less developed states.[36][37] Changes in state cadres were only permitted on grounds of marriage to an All India Services officer of another state cadre or under other exceptional circumstances. The officers were allowed to go to their home state cadre on deputation for a limited period after which they would be required to return to their allocated cadre.[36][37]
From 2008, IAS officers were assigned to state cadres at the beginning of their service. There was one cadre for each Indian state, except for twojoint cadres: Assam–Meghalaya and Arunachal Pradesh–Goa–Mizoram–Union Territories (AGMUT).[37] The "insider-outsider ratio" (ratio of officers who were posted to their home states to those from other states) was maintained at 1:2, with one-third of the direct recruits being 'insiders' from the same state.[38] The rest were posted as outsiders according to the state allocation roster in states other than their home states,[38] as indicated by their preference.
Responsibilities of an IAS officer
The Prime Minister with IAS officers of 2017 batch in New Delhi
The typical functions performed by an IAS officer are:
To collect revenue and function as court officials in matters of revenue and crime (for the revenue courts and criminal courts of executive magistrates), to maintain law and order, to implement union and state government policies at the grass-roots level when posted to field positions i.e. as Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Additional District Magistrate, District Magistrate and Divisional Commissioner, and to act as an agent of the government in the field, i.e. to act as an intermediary between the public and the government.[4][39][40][41]
To handle the administration and daily proceedings of the government, including the formulation and implementation of policy in consultation with the minister-in-charge of a specific ministry or department.[4][39][40][41]
To contribute to policy formulation, and to make a final decision in certain matters, with the agreement of the minister concerned or the council of ministers (depending upon the weight of the matter), when posted at the higher level in the Government of India as a joint secretary, additional secretary, special secretary or secretary equivalent, secretary and Cabinet Secretary, and in state governments as secretary, principal secretary, additional chief secretary or special chief secretary and chief secretary.[4][39][40][41]
In 2015 it was announced that a new designation of assistant secretary at the Central Secretariat had been created to enable new IAS officers to be posted to Delhi for a three-month assignment as part of their training regime. IAS officers were previously only permitted to go on a deputation once assigned to the Central Secretariat after nine years of service in their home cadre. It was observed that the experience of central functions was severely lacking among these deputations, resulting in this change in their training.[43][44][45] As part of the new system, IAS assistant secretaries are supposed to work on projects—a new policy in their respective areas—and present it to their respective ministries; of all projects, 36 are selected to be presented before all secretaries of the Government of India; consequently, 16 are selected to be before the Cabinet Secretary and a final eight are selected for presentation before the Prime Minister.[46]
Completion of this probation is followed by an executive role in a district as a district collector cum district magistrate, which lasts several years. After this tenure as a district magistrate, the officer may be promoted to head a whole state division, as a divisional commissioner. After serving as a district magistrate and district collector or deputy commissioner, IAS officers can be posted to various positions in the state government. These positions include secretary or principal secretary in different departments, director of a department, commissioner of a division, or chairman of a government corporation. The specific positions depend on the officer's seniority, experience, and performance. The highest positions that an IAS officer can attain include chief secretary of a state, cabinet secretary (the highest-ranking civil servant in the country), and other positions at the apex level of administration. These positions involve leading and managing the bureaucracy, advising the political leadership, and handling important policy matters.
As an IAS officer progresses in their career, they become eligible for important positions in the central government. These positions include joint secretary, additional secretary, and secretary in different ministries and departments. In these roles, IAS officers are involved in making policies, implementing them, and making important decisions at the national level. They can also be appointed as advisors to the central government or serve in autonomous bodies, commissions, and international organizations. These opportunities allow IAS officers to contribute to the development and governance of the country on a larger scale.[47][48]
^Purchasing power parities (PPP) dollars for comparison.
^IAS officers of the designations additional chief secretary and special chief secretary draw same pay as the chief secretary of the state but not same protocol.[63][64][65]
^IAS officers of the designation special secretary to the Government of India or secretary-equivalent draw the same pay as a secretary to the Government of India but not same protocol.[66][67][68]
^ abcdefghAlternate designations and nomenclature can differs from state to state.
^Alternate designations – District collector, district officer,deputy commissioner.[69]
^Alternate designations – Chief development officer, district development officer, project director of DRDA, DUDA, IRDP etc., additional district collector, joint collector, additional deputy commissioner, CEO of zila parishad.
IAS officers can also be deputed to private organisations for a fixed tenure under Rule 6(2)(ii) of the Indian Administrative Service (Cadre) Rules, 1954.[80][81]
Assessment of suitability for promotion and posting
The performance of IAS officers is assessed through a performance appraisal report. The reports are reviewed to judge the suitability of an officer before a promotion or a posting in the union or state governments. The report is compiled annually and is initiated by the officers themselves, designated as the reporting officer, who list their achievements, completion of assigned activities and targets for the year. The report is then modified and commented on by the reviewing officer, usually the superior of the reporting officer. All the Reports are forwarded by the reviewing officer to the accepting authority, who conducts a final review of the report.[3]
Popular belief
In popular perception, the allure of pursuing a career in the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) lies in the associated privileges and benefits, which drive hundreds of thousands of candidates to compete for a limited number of positions each year. The position of an IAS officer is commonly regarded as a gateway to power, privilege, and elevated social status. Criticisms of the country's bureaucracy have persisted over time, with detractors highlighting its cumbersome nature, slow decision-making processes, inefficiency, and occasional instances of corruption. These deficiencies have become so widely acknowledged that the Indian bureaucracy often becomes the subject of relentless satirical portrayals in popular culture.[82]
Prestige and Status
The IAS is considered a symbol of prestige and power in Indian society. The IAS is widely regarded as one of the most prestigious and elite career options in India. The service is associated with high social status, respect, and recognition. IAS officers often enjoy a privileged position in society and are held in high regard by the public.[83]
Power and Authority
IAS officers are believed to wield significant power and authority in their roles. They are responsible for implementing government policies, making crucial decisions, and overseeing the administration at various levels, including the district, state, and central government. The power to influence policy and bring about positive change is often attributed to IAS officers.[84]
Competitive and Challenging Exam
The selection process for the IAS, which includes the Civil Services Examination (CSE), is considered extremely competitive and challenging. It requires extensive preparation, knowledge, and dedication. The difficulty of the exam is often emphasized, and clearing it is seen as a notable achievement.[85][86]
Bureaucracy and red tape
There is a perception that the bureaucratic system, including the IAS, is characterized by red tape, complex procedures, and slow decision-making. Some people believe that the bureaucratic hurdles can hinder efficient governance and delay the implementation of policies and projects.[87]
Major concerns and reforms
Shortage of officers
It was reported in 2017 that there is a shortage of about 1,700IAS officers in the country.[88][89][90] Despite this, the government has stated that annual recruitment of IAS officers will not increase, to avoid impacting the career progression of existing officers and the overall structure of the service.[10][91]
Lack of accountability
Critics argue that the IAS lacks adequate mechanisms for holding bureaucrats accountable for their actions. This can lead to a culture of impunity and inefficiency, as civil servants may not face consequences for poor performance or misconduct.[92] Critics argue that bureaucracy can lead to a lack of accountability as unelected bureaucrats hold significant decision-making power. They argue that bureaucrats, who are not directly accountable to the public through elections, can wield significant influence over policies and implementation without facing direct consequences for their actions.
Insularity and elitism
The IAS has been criticized for being insular and disconnected from the ground realities faced by citizens. This can result in a lack of empathy and understanding of the needs and aspirations of the people, leading to ineffective policies and programs.[93]
Centralization of power
The IAS is a highly centralized bureaucracy, with decision-making power concentrated at the higher levels of the hierarchy. This centralized structure can impede decentralization efforts and limit the involvement of lower-level administrators and local stakeholders in decision-making processes.[94]
Resistance to change
The bureaucratic culture within the IAS can sometimes lead to resistance to change and a reluctance to adopt new ideas or reforms. This can hinder innovation and prevent the adoption of best practices, making it challenging to address emerging challenges effectively.[95]
Lateral entry
Media personalities, some retired IAS officers and a few academics have argued in favour of lateral entry into the IAS to inject fresh blood into the service. They argue that it would help refresh the bureaucracy, offer competitiveness and bring in alternate perspectives.[96][97][98][99][100][101] A counter-argument has been put forward that a lateral entry process could be manipulated due to corruption and cronyism.[102] It is further argued that lateral entry would not lead to improvements in managerial performance or accountability,[103] and while it may create synergy between the government and big businesses, it could also compromise the integrity of government.[104] It has also been argued that it could weaken the bureaucracy instead.[105] The union government has frequently ruled out lateral entry into the IAS.[106][107][108]
Political influence
The IAS is hamstrung by political interference, outdated personnel procedures, and a mixed record on policy implementation, and it is in need of urgent reform. The Indian government should reshape recruitment and promotion processes, improve performance-based assessment of individual officers, and adopt safeguards that promote accountability while protecting bureaucrats from political meddling.
Several think tanks and media outlets have argued that the IAS is hamstrung by political influence within the service.[17][110][111][112] It has been reported that many local political leaders have been seen to have interfered with IAS officers. Politicians have also exerted pressure on IAS officers by repeatedly transferring them,[113][114][115][116] suspending them,[117][118][119] beating them,[120][121][122] and, in some extreme cases, killing them.[123][124]
Several academic papers have shown IAS to be a significant contributor to crony capitalism in India.[129][130] In 2015, it was reported by the Government of India that a hundred IAS officers had come under scrutiny by the Central Bureau of Investigation for alleged corruption.[131][132][133][134] In 2017 Government records showed that 379 IAS officers had deliberately failed to submit details of their immovable assets (IPR).[135] Since 2007, a number of chief secretaries[136][137][138] and a principal secretary[139][140][141] have been arrested in cases of graft or money laundering.[142][143][144] IAS officers have been found amassing disproportionate assets and wealth varying from ₹200 crore (equivalent to ₹234 crore or US$29 million in 2023),[145] to ₹800 crore (equivalent to ₹938 crore or US$120 million in 2023).[146][145][147] In 2016 it was reported that the Government would provide the means to prosecute corrupt IAS officers,[148] with the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions agreeing to receive requests from private citizens seeking punitive measures against IAS officers even without supporting documentation.[148]
In 2017 it was reported by the Department of Personnel and Training, part of the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, that, since 2014, one IAS officer was prematurely retired from service, ten IAS officers had been deemed to have resigned, five had their pensions cut, and a further eight IAS officers suffered a cut in remuneration.[151][152][153][154]
During year 2020–21, 581 corruption charges were filed against IAS officers.[157] Further, a total of 753 complaints were received against the IAS officers in 2019-20 and 643 in 2018–19.[157]
Abandonment of service
In June 2015, The Telegraph reported that twelve IAS officers had gone missing, and had not reported to either the union or the state government for their allocated cadre.[2] It was believed that they were working in foreign countries for companies such as Microsoft for more lucrative pay.[2]The Asian Age later reported that the services of three of the twelve officers were likely to be terminated due to "prolonged absence from service".[158]
^ abSchiavo-Campo, Salvatore; Tommaso, de Giulio; Mukherjee, Amitabha (1999). Government Employment and Pay: A Global and Regional Perspective. Washington D. C.: World Bank. p. 23. OCLC913715804.
^Saxena, Vaishali (2003). Bureaucracy on Wheels: Trauma of Transfers in the Indian Administrative Service. Jaipur: Aalekh Publishers. ISBN978-8187359210. OCLC191202280.
^Srivastava, Ritesh K.(The Observer) (5 March 2012). "Empowering the EC". Zee News. Archived from the original on 19 December 2014. Retrieved 19 December 2014.
Saxena, Vaishali (2003). Bureaucracy on Wheels: Trauma of Transfers in the Indian Administrative Service. Jaipur: Aalekh Publishers. ISBN978-8187359210. OCLC191202280.
Schiavo-Campo, Salvatore; Tommaso, de Giulio; Mukherjee, Amitabha (1999). Government Employment and Pay: A Global and Regional Perspective. Washington D. C.: World Bank. OCLC913715804.