Sanjeev Sanyal's Take on Civil Services Exam Prep Deemed 'Absurd' by Ex-Bureaucrats

In a recent development from New Delhi, comments made by Sanjeev Sanyal, a member of the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister (EAC-PM), have sparked a debate among former bureaucrats. Sanyal's remarks, suggesting that dedicating five to eight years to prepare for civil services exams constitutes a waste of youthful energy, have been met with criticism. This statement was made public through a series of posts on the social media platform X.

Former Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer G Sundaram labeled the comments as "absurd," emphasizing the importance of government services in nation-building. Sundaram, who served as the Tourism Secretary and belongs to the 1962 Gujarat cadre, highlighted the historical significance of these services, initiated by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, for a united India. He further noted that while there may be deficiencies, they are rectifiable and do not warrant such criticism.

Similarly, S K Sarkar, another esteemed former bureaucrat and secretary of the Department of Personnel and Training, disagreed with Sanyal's viewpoint. Sarkar, a 1979-batch IAS officer from the West Bengal cadre, underscored the aspirational value of government services in India, stating they play a crucial role in the country's development and nation-building efforts.

Sanjeev Chopra, a former IAS officer and Director of the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration in Mussoorie, also responded to Sanyal's comments. Chopra argued that while Sanyal is entitled to his opinions, being critical of individuals aspiring to civil service roles is inappropriate. He highlighted the diverse aspirations of individuals, including those aiming for significant government positions that offer extensive coverage and fulfillment.

Kiran Puri, a former officer of the Central Secretariat Service from the 1983 batch, echoed these sentiments. Puri stressed the importance of attracting academically strong and knowledgeable individuals to the civil services for the country's administration and development.

However, former chief election commissioner S Y Quraishi offered a nuanced view, partially agreeing with Sanyal. Quraishi acknowledged that young people invest significant time preparing for civil services exams, often leaving lucrative jobs behind. He suggested limiting the number of attempts for these examinations to streamline the process and make it more efficient.

Contrary to Sanyal's views, serving Indian Police Service (IPS) officer Pankaj Chaudhary defended the civil services examination process. Chaudhary, a 2009-batch IPS officer from Rajasthan and a Hindi topper in the 2008 civil services examination, praised the transparency and fairness of the UPSC examination system. He highlighted his own experience as evidence of the examination's credibility and its role in providing equal opportunities.

The Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) annually conducts this rigorous examination process in three stages—preliminary, main, and personality test (interview)—to select officers for various central services. The debate surrounding Sanyal's comments underscores the enduring value placed on civil services in India and the diverse perspectives on how best to prepare for such esteemed roles.