In response to a press statement by the Government spokesperson on the recent IAS induction, the Joint Coordination Committee (JCC) has raised concerns over what it terms a “bureaucratic procedural lapse” in the recruitment process.
“The whole impasse of the IAS induction has been blamed on bureaucratic misadventure,” the JCC stated, noting that while bureaucracy has “often served as a convenient scapegoat,” the prestige and respect of the IAS is now “threatened by procedural manipulation to induct an irregular appointee into IAS to be equated with the rest.”
The Government spokesperson had acknowledged that “the error has occurred because the circular was neither placed before the Chief Minister who oversees the P&AR Department, nor approved by the Cabinet prior to issue.” The JCC pointed out, however, that “the same order with the same content was issued by the same authority on 6 July 2020, approved by the Hon’ble CM, and from which a candidate was selected and inducted into the IAS, governed by the same clause.”
The committee emphasized that if “the bureaucracy fell short of procedural duties and responsibilities in processing the circular, when it concerns the greater good of the State and the people, it is expected of the concerned authorities who has a moral and legal duty to ensure that the lapse of procedure is addressed rather than removing the circular.” The JCC further argued: “A disease when detected in a patient, it is incumbent to treat and fix the disease and not exterminate the patient.”
Clause 4 of the Vacancy Circular, the JCC noted, “does not violate the principle of meritocracy” and “poses no threat to the efficiency in governance but rather strengthens it,” meaning that “the lapse of pending procedure could be cured by ratifying it if the procedure so demands.”
The JCC also condemned what it called “the unfortunate mis-statement of the Government spokesperson with regard to the names of officers who has been inducted into the IAS from the Non-SCS quota in the past,” describing the list provided as “biased and incomplete, but also factually incorrect and defames NPSC qualified IAS, categorized as non-NPSC.”
Tracing the evolution of recruitment practices, the JCC reminded that “there was a time in the past when there was no competitive exam for recruitment and barely any candidate for government service,” and stressed that “precedence should be given importance if only it is rooted in fairness, justice and in public interest.” They highlighted that the 6th July 2020 Vacancy Circular required NPSC eligibility through Clause 4, which was followed without complaints from the public, applicants, Cabinet, or Government.
“The same circular with the same eligibility criteria was again advertised on 10th March 2025 only to be retracted to enable it to accommodate an applicant whose appointment and entry into service is irregular, thus violative of Article 16 of the Constitution,” the JCC charged.
On attempts at dialogue, the JCC revealed that “the JC has written several representations to the government beginning from March 2025, just after the circular was withdrawn arbitrarily. In spite of several representations, there was no invitation for discourse and the JCC was compelled to protest.”
Critiquing the government’s justification, the JCC cited the statement: “if that order (10th March 2025 Vacancy Circular) had barred those officers whose entry was not from NPSC from participating, then that order was recalled/cancelled.” They argued that “this statement itself exposes the favoritism, nepotism and premeditated preference of a particular candidate inspite of availability of other meritorious applicants.”
The committee urged that “while the Cabinet has the discretionary powers over policy matters, it has a responsibility to the state to ensure the best interest of the people and the government through fairness and merit,” and stressed the need for the government to demonstrate “its wisdom” in the Sub-Committee process.
The JCC stressed that merit and fairness must prevail over convention, and that administrative practices or customs should not supersede constitutional principles or statutory provisions of meritocracy. They stressed that administrative accountability must accompany any claim of procedural lapse, and that peaceful dialogue should be grounded in the rule of law rather than in defending outdated practices.
In terms of demands, the JCC called for the restoration of Clause-4 of the Vacancy Circular of 10th March 2025 and the withdrawal of Non-NPSC appointees from the Panel List forwarded to the UPSC.