Administrative bankruptcy

WHILE Mr Gurdev Singh (Role of bureaucracy, The Tribune, April 22) is not the first to judge the Indian bureaucracy as “inefficient and corrupt”, he is certainly one of very few people to opine that administrative reforms can be brought about by simple and easy means like the abolition of unnecessary posts and decentralisation of powers. It certainly does not require to institute a commission on administrative reforms.

“Monumental bureaucratic failings” like overstaffing and almost pathological centralisation of powers have been consciously and tenaciously aimed at. The interests of the bureaucracy have taken precedence over public interest. The post of District Food and Supplies Controller, for example, was created so that every citizen in the district could have a valid ration card against which he/she could get the facility of necessities of life at reasonable prices, and yet no DFSC has ever been penalised because a sizeable percentage of the population in any district remains without ration cards. People get paid for raising objections on the applications.

Similarly, no tehsildar has ever been punished for the faulty maintenance of land records which leads to an increased number of land disputes. Nor has a Licensing Authority been terminated/suspended because a significant percentage of the population in an area takes to driving without a valid licence apparently because of the harassment inflicted upon (honest) applicants.

A claim for payment submitted to an office is scrutinised by the Office Accountant, Superintendent, DDO, the Treasury office before it is finally paid, and yet in case an overpayment is detected, the recovery is to be effected from the claimant. What are the accountants and auditors paid for?

An electricity bill, water bill and telephone bill is required to be paid by the consumer even if the bill is wrong. The clerk and the officer responsible for the wrong bill cannot be penalised.

And, finally, every DC, the custodian of law and order, drives through highways along which dhabas are run with child-labour, walks through streets where encroachments are the rule, visits shops from which rows of customers emerge without proper receipts for the goods purchased.

All this started soon after Lal Bahadur Shastri’s death, when the nexus between the politician and the bureaucrat came to be established. The writer has correctly described the genesis of this nexus, and everybody will agree with him that the wayout lies in reducing the number of politicians and bureaucrats and decentralisation of powers.

It is not a chance that the most severely criticised class of employees — the IAS officers — are the best paid government servants.

L. R. SHARMA
Solan

* * * *

Erosion of values

This refers to Ms Talveen Singh’s “Did President goof on trust vote advice? (April 24). The political atmosphere in the country has grown so ugly and unpleasant that one can hope neither for the stability nor any meaningful governance. While the Opposition’s toppling of the BJP-led coalition government was not only ill-timed and needless, it has also proved to be against national interests.

The on-going manipulative polarisation of the so-called secular forces against the alleged communal parties is only an attempt to befool the nation. Their “noble sentiments” of concern for national welfare betray a squalid and sleazy drama behind the whole show.

The paradoxical and confusing stand being taken by different parties and leaders is indicative of a persistent erosion of the moral values in democratic functioning and a responsive governance. The future of the Indian system of democratic governance, if not grim, is not encouraging either. Yet if there is any ray of hope, is from the electorate, who alone can judge and decide the claims of different leaders. The President should not pay any more heed to the legal and constitutional arguments advanced in their favour by different political parties. In the best interest of the country, he should leave it to the voter to bring out clarity and stability to the political governance of the country.

VED GULIANI
Hisar

* * * *

Vote of confidence

How is it that despite the fact that neither the President nor the Prime Minister nor any other leader was in favour of a mid-term poll and yet it has been foisted on us. This is a classic example of our utter helplessness on a national scale. In my opinion, the villain of the piece in this case is the management tool called “Vote of confidence”. Outwardly, it is an innocent device for gauging the popularity of the ruling party in the House, but in practice the amount of mischief it is causing is much more than what meets the naked eye.

Each member of the House has one vote which he can exercise in two ways: positive and negative. The positive one is decisive and indicates the acceptance whereas the negative one is interim, indicating rejection and leaving the acceptance to be decided later on.

The current crisis in the Lok Sabha started when one of the allies of the ruling party withdrew its support, and consequently the President asked the Vajpayee government to secure a “Vote of confidence”. It was defeated and had to resign because only 269 votes were cast in its favour, and 270 were against it. This means 270 members had cast a “benami” vote and had yet to make their final choice. They could not do it concurrently because the President had yet to decide about the candidature of the alternative aspirants for the office of Prime Minister. From the Lok Sabha, the scene now shifted to Rashtrapati Bhavan where the President started consultations with various political leaders and constitutional experts. After about a week, he came to the conclusion that no alternative candidate was available and hence the Lok Sabha dissolution.

How sad it is that this discovery was made only after the Vajpayee government had been pushed out of the office. The common man is frustrated and baffled as to why this could not be done before asking the government to secure the vote of confidence. This would have made a tremendous difference in the voting pattern and may have saved the nation the cost and the agony of a mid-term poll. It would also have saved the President the strain of going through a huge exercise in futility.

The right course for the President was that as soon as the Vajpayee government had lost the support of one of its allies, it should have invited nomination from those aspiring to become Prime Minister, and then ask the Speaker to determine on the floor of the House the strength which each of them enjoyed. The winner should have been invited to form the government.

S. P. MALHOTRA
Panchkula

* * * *

Mockery of democracy

What is happening in the Indian polity is nothing but a mockery of democracy. During a period of three years, elections to the Lok Sabha are going to be held for the third time thereby putting an enormous burden on the exchequer.

Frequent elections pose a grave threat to democracy as well as to the economy of the country. If the political history of the last few years is any guide, coalition governments have become an integral part of the Indian polity.

The pity is that coalition governments are formed by a major political party with the participation or outside support of such splinter groups as do not have cohesion among themselves. They are poles apart from one another in so far as ideologies or programmes are concerned.

The Indian political scene has acquired stereo-typed phrases like “Casteism,” “Communalism,” “Dalit welfare,” “National agenda,” “Secularism,” “Issue-based support,” etc. The time has come when all these hypocritical phrases are given a gobye.

Even during the ensuing elections chances of one party securing absolute majority are extremely remote. Then what is the fun in spending crores of rupees on elections after every one year or two.

It is high time the saner elements in all the political parties, some constitutional experts, political reformers and a few intellectuals sat together to ponder over the matter seriously and find out some ways to remedy the malaise.

I feel the best remedy is to make it obligatory for every party not to withdraw the support from the ruling party once it is declared in the first instance. In that case, the government is bound to complete its term of five years. In case any party withdraws its support, the members of that party be disqualified from the membership of the Lok Sabha for the remaining term.

SATISH GOSWAMI
Ludhiana

* * * *

Nabha controversy

This is with reference to the letter of Mr Harry Kandah published on April 26.

It appears he has been a student of PPS, Nabha. He has described the simple-minded devotees of the temple as gangsters and criminals. What a civilised language! That reflects upon him as well as his teachers and parents. He has chosen to pass judgement without knowing the ground realities. His approach is immature and far from constructive. I hope he is not the prototype of the ex-students of PPS, Nabha.

When you love an institution the right thing is to come down to it, spend time and make efforts to find the solution to the problems it faces, rather than add fuel to the fire and complicate matters by statements from a distance.

The matter at hand is simple. The school behind the temple and the plot in front of the temple are both situated on government land. Neither the temple is situated on school land nor the school is on temple land. The way the government has given vast grounds to PP School, the same way it can give the small plot in front of the temple to the temple committee, so that both the temple and the school are completely cut off from each other, and neither of them interferes in the working of the other. The matter is as simple as that.

The government can follow similar precedents of giving land to places of worship in the past, to generate immense goodwill — for example, Gurdwara Dukhniwaran Sahib at Patiala and Gurdwara Sis Ganj at Delhi.

YASH PAUL GOYAL
Nabha