Andhra Pradesh Secretariat

A Review of Structure, Systems, Processes and Personnel

C R KAMALANATHAN

INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC ENTERPRISE

O U Campus, Hyderabad
February, 2006

1
 Andhra Pradesh Secretariat
A Review of Structure, Systems, Processes and Personnel

CONTENTS

Chapter No Subject Page No

1 The Machinery of Government and the Secretariat 1

2 Analysis of Machinery at Work 30

3 Earlier Committee Reports and Studies 48

4 Findings and Recommendations 57

References 112

2
 (i)
Andhra Pradesh Secretariat
A Review of Structure, Systems, Processes and Personnel

DETAILED CONTENTS

Chapter Subject Page No

No
1 The Machinery of Government and the Secretariat 1-29
Scope of the Study
Evolution of Secretariat
Machinery of Government in India
State Executive and the Government Secretariat
Field Organizations of Government
Local Government Institutions
Council of Ministers
Allocation and Transaction of Business
Allocation of Work of Ministers to Officers
Reference of Cases to Chief Minister
Cabinet Committees
Subjects to be brought before Cabinet

Allocation of Subjects to Departments

Andhra Pradesh Secretariat Over the Years
Present Composition of Secretariat
Size of Secretariat in Other States
Sub Departments within Departments
Wings of Secretariat
Sector / Subject Departments
Coordinating Departments
Interdepartmental Consultation
General Administration Department
Finance Department
Planning Department
Public Enterprises Department
IT & C Department
Law Department
Legislature Department

Official Hierarchy in the Secretariat

Secretariat Personnel

Crucial Role of Chief Ministers Office

3
 (ii)

2 Analysis of Machinery at Work 30-47

Proliferation of Departments
Emergence of Sub Departments
Extremes of Size of Departments
Failed Experiment in Sectoral Coordination
Ex-officio Secretaries of Line Departments
Number and Diversity of Field Agencies
Duplication of Functions of Organizations
Mismatch of Structure and Civil Service Positions
Political Executive
Policy Vs Implementation, Precept and Practice
Layers of Futile Processing
Preoccupation with Routine
Designed not to Deliver
Problems of Coordination
Silo Mentality of Departments
Inadequacy of Policy Capacity
Outmoded Base and Unsuitable Personnel
Mismanagement of Personnel Issues
Defective Personnel Policy
Rampant Corruption
Working Environment and Response to Public

3 Earlier Committee Reports and Studies 48-56

A D Gorwala Committee
Unnithan Committee
M R Pai and G Ram Reddy Study
Ramchandra Reddy Committee
K B Lal Committee
G Ram Reddy and G Haragopal Study
M K Rustomji and Associates
S R Ramamurthy Committee
Reports of Other States

4 Findings and Recommendations 57-111

Impact of Expanding Role

Reform Trends
Structural Adjustment Initiatives
New Public Management
Responsive Governance

4
 (iii)
Reform Initiatives in A P Secretariat
Why the Secretariat?
Coordinating Departments and Subject Departments
Combining Line and Staff?
Increasing Number and Size of Departments
Central Pattern of Ministry and Departments within
Identity of Portfolio and Department
Reallocation of Subjects
Right-sizing of Machinery
Privatization
Outsourcing
Reducing Size of Civil Service
Corporatization
Devolution of Powers, Functions, Finances and
Functionaries
Delegation of Powers and Functions
By Cabinet
By Political Executive
Petition Handling
By Coordinating Departments
By Subject Departments
De-concentration Within
Flattening Levels
Officer Oriented Administration
Shared Services
Regulatory Reform
Simplification of Procedures
ICT Application
Citizen Facilitation and Infrastructure
Personnel Policy
Civil Service Reforms and HR Development
Strengthening Policy Capacity
Civil Society Involvement in Policy
Policy Coherence
Coordination of Policy
Sectoral Policy Coordination
Effective Cabinet Meetings
Reforming Business Processes
Communication
Coordination Mechanisms
Monitoring and Evaluation

References 112-113

5
 Chapter 1

The Machinery of Government and the Secretariat

Scope of the Study

A study of the machinery of Government usually examines its structures that facilitate the
allocation of functions between departments; the creation, abolition or amalgamation of
departments; and systems that enable coordination of activities among them. It also covers the
internal structure of departments and the allocation of functions within departments and to
outside bodies. This paper attempts to assess the machinery of the Andhra Pradesh State
Government Executive Secretariat as it is organized at present; identify areas of reform; and to
outline possible measures to strengthen its structure, systems, processes and personnel, and to
improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the management and direction of the affairs of the
Executive wing on the one hand; and enhance its interaction with and responsiveness to the
citizen, the private sector and the civil society on the other. In particular it outlines the manner in
which secretariat activities in relation to formulation, approval, communication, feedback and
evaluation of policies, laws, regulations, decisions and programmes could be modernized and
more effectively coordinated so as to raise the standards of delivery of public services.

The administrative structure of Executive Government is the framework within which the
permanent civil service operates under the supervision, control and direction of the political
executive coordinating the different parts of the machinery and interacting with other
Government agencies and the world outside Government (UNDP Civil Service Reforms).
Machinery changes are often brought in based on an expectation that better structures will
produce better results. Adhoc structural reforms in some countries till the early 1990s had relied
more on legislative changes superimposed on outdated organizational structure rather than
based on an in-depth analysis of structural problems themselves. Now there is a holistic
approach to such reform through functional reviews which seeks to balance a focus on internal
reform with a concern for changing relations between public administration and society (UNDP
Public Administration Reforms) with primary functions of redefining roles, missions and
functions of different layers of administration, identifying redundancy and duplication of
functions, new functions and the possibility of rationalizing functions that need to be continued,
backed by a statutory framework and staff appropriate to the new roles and functions with
requisite levers of horizontal and vertical coordination. Structures can be rationalized to create
strategic mechanisms and processes for policy and decision making coordination. It has to be
borne in mind however that mere structural reform is not a panacea for improving public service
delivery. Equally important is to have good personnel to run the machinery. Even bad structures
can work under able hands but the opposite cannot always be so.

Evolution of Secretariat

A brief historical overview of the Andhra Pradesh Secretariat would take one back to the Madras
Settlement of the English East India Company and the British Government and the Nizams
Dominions. A small fort which came to be known as the Fort St George established on the

6
Coromandal Coast in 1640 is even today the seat of the Tamilnadu Secretariat. The Tamilnadu
Secretariat started with the Public Department in 1670 with a Secretary who dealt with all
business of Government. (The Public Department, as pruned over time exists even today as the
department of the Chief Secretary, the equivalent of which is the General Administration
Department in Andhra Pradesh). The Secretariat also kept on expanding with the territorial
expansion of the colony over time; and new departments got created one by one like the Military
Department in 1752, the Revenue Department in 1774, the Secret Department in 1796 and the
Judicial Department in 1798. The five Boards viz., the Board of Revenue, the Board of Trade,
the Military Board, the Hospital Board and the Marine Board were constituted for field
administration in 1786 with subordinate departments placed under the control of these Boards.
(The Board of Revenue continued to exist in Andhra Pradesh as a field coordination department
till the 1980s) The post of Chief Secretary came into being in 1800 with three other secretaries
with Chief Secretary holding charge of political and secret departments. Finance department got
established in 1811 and a Law Department in 1815. In 1831 the Chief Secretary came to be in
charge of political, secret, and public department which comprised Finance, Law, Commercial,
Ecclesiastical and General Branches. From then on the Chief Secretary became the Head of the
Secretariat. Public Works Department came into being in 1843 among others. In 1857
administration of the Madras Presidency came under the direct control of the Crown,
necessitating changes in the secretariat set up with Chief Secretary becoming in charge of
Revenue, Political and Legislative Departments. For the first time a new Development
department came into being in 1921 dealing with Agriculture, Cooperation, Civil Supplies,
Factories, Forests, Industries, Mines, Trade, Animal Husbandry, etc. Reorganization in 1936
brought the following nine departments into existence viz: i) Public ii) Home iii) Finance iv)
Legal v) Revenue vi) Local Self Government vii) Development; viii) Education and Public
Health; and ix) Public Works

Machinery of Government in India

The provisions of the Government of India Act, 1935, formalized the Government structure of
India during the British period. The Constitution of India, which envisages the country as a
Union of States, has drawn up substantially on this. In the way it is constituted, it is not a truly
federal state, with provinces joined together to constitute the Union. The 73rd and 74th
amendments to the Constitution have strengthened the claim of the rural and urban local self
Government institutions as the third tier of this loose federal structure comprising the Centre and
the States.

State Executive and the Government Secretariat

Ours is a Parliamentary system of Cabinet Government following the Commonwealth tradition

with the three wings of Executive, Judiciary and Legislature; with a legitimate system of
delegation from the Legislature to the Government, and within Government, from the cabinet to
ministers and from ministers to departments and agencies. Parts V and VI of the Constitution
deal with the Union and State Executive respectively. Article 154 of the Constitution vests the
Executive power of a State in the Governor, who is required to exercise it, either directly or
through officers subordinate to him, in accordance with the Constitution. The executive
structure of Government of a State comprises two parts viz., the political executive represented

7
by the Council of Ministers headed by the Chief Minister and the administrative structure
comprising the permanent Civil Service discharging staff functions at the centre of Government
and line functions in the field. Executive Government thus involves bringing these two groups
of players in a harmonious way together to discharge its responsibilities to the citizens.

The two are brought together in the Government Secretariat. The Secretariat can be said to be
the administrative headquarters that serves the Head of the Government, the Council of Ministers
and the Ministers. The main responsibility of the secretariat, which is not purely administrative
in the sense of executing orders of the Government or the Minister, is derived from the collective
responsibility of the Ministers constituting the Council. By its very nature it has one foot in
the administrative world and the other in the political world. These organizations are the buckles
that link the political and administrative, and as such are the crucial elements in any process of
governance. The secretariat therefore has to simultaneously manage up to ministers and
manage down to public service departments and their managers and manage out by relating the
work of Government to private sector organizations and NGOs. (World Bank)

Field Organizations of Government

Each secretariat department may have, in its charge or under it, field organizations which may be
statutory authorities, heads of departments, statutory corporations, Government companies,
cooperatives, societies, or other institutions which are collectively called instrumentalities of
the State in terms of Article 12 of the Constitution. Regular Heads Departments under
Government are obliged to act in accordance with the laws, rules, codes and procedures laid
down by the Government, where as agencies like corporations, societies etc., set up by
Government for the purpose of discharging development / welfare etc., functions of Government
are not subject to such discipline and have liberty to formulate their own rules and regulations for
conduct of business and control of personnel. Heads of Departments are notified by Government
for the purpose of Financial Budgetary functions and for purposes of cadre control of Civil
Servants. Heads of Departments are notified by the Finance Department for finance purposes
and Heads Department for the purposes of cadre regulations by the General Administration
(Services) Department.

The Presidential Order on Public Employment requires the Government field departments to
organize their field units co-terminus with the zones and districts or to make them fall wholly
within them. Andhra Pradesh doesnt have a uniform territorial hierarchy in respect of
departmental field structure. Some of them are only head quarters organizations without any
field units of their own where necessary depending on the revenue or the Panchayat Raj
establishment to discharge their obligations in the field if any. Some have service institutions in
the districts along with controlling departmental units at the regional and or departmental level.
Some major departments are spread throughout the State right down to the village level with
circle, mandal, divisional, district, regional and head quarters establishments, while small
departments have a primarily two tier head quarters / district set up. The Police Department and
Engineering Departments are among those which have a full fledged multi level hierarchical set
up. On the other hand a department like Revenue has a Head Quarters / District structure,
skipping the regional level, with divisional, mandal, circle, and revenue village set up below in
each district.

8
Local Government Institutions

An alternate modality of devolved district / local governance is sought to be achieved through

devolution of powers under the Constitution to local government institutions. The Article 243
contemplates a three tier hierarchical structure for the rural local bodies at the village,
intermediate and district levels which in Andhra Pradesh are called the Zilla Parishad, Mandal
Praja Parishad and the Gram Panchayat. Similarly urban local bodies constituted under Article
243 P to 243 Z A. contemplate a Nagar Panchayat for a rural area in transition to an urban unit, a
municipal council for a small town and a Municipal Corporation for a city. The provisions
relating to the panchayats and municipalities as they stand today are the result of the 73rd & 74th
amendments to the Constitution which introduced new 11th & 12th schedules in the Constitution
listing subjects allocated to the third tier of Government. The 11th schedule lists 29 subjects
which may be entrusted to Panchayats by the State Legislature at its absolute discretion.
Similarly the 12th schedule lists 18 subjects in relation to urban local bodies. In so far as the
State Government has full legislative and executive powers in respect of State subjects, some of
which are listed in the portfolio of the local bodies, the extent of powers of local Governments in
respect of these subjects is entirely subject to the discretion of the State executive and legislature.
Actual practice also indicates a marked reluctance on the part of State Governments to transfer
real control and authority in respect of these subjects to the local bodies. Thus local bodies are
virtually at the mercy of the State Government and effective local self-Government institutions
are yet to emerge based on effective devolution of functions contemplated with requisite
financial and personnel autonomy, continuing to concentrate power, purse and personnel in the
hands of the field departmental and other organizations reporting and responsible to
Government. But effective financial devolutions in pursuance of the recommendations and
following the spirit of the Constitutional amendments are yet to take place.

Mere transfer of responsibility without power is of no avail. On the analogy of appointment of a

Finance Commission to make recommendations in respect of sharing of taxes between the Union
and State, and for provision of grant in aid to States (which also makes recommendations for
supplementation of resources of Panchayats and Municipalities) each State Government is
required to constitute every five years a Finance Commission to review the financial position of
the local bodies to make recommendations on distribution of State taxes revenue, assignment of
taxes / duties / tolls / fees which may be assigned to the Panchayats, sanction of grant in aid and
for to Panchayats and Municipalities.

9
The following is a diagram depicting the Executive structure of State Government:

Machinery of Government - Executive Structure

Union of India
Judiciary Executive Legislature
States

Council of Permanent
Ministers Civil Service

Policy Advice
Chief CMO ------------------
Minister Secretariat

Personal Office
Coordinating Sectoral
Ministers Departments Departments

Field Implementing
Agencies

Head Quarters
Units

Heads of Statutory,
Departments Corporate and
Other Agencies

Local Bodies Field Units - Regional / District /

Urban / Rural Division / Mandal / Circle
/Village

10
Council of Ministers

The Council of Ministers, which is the highest decision making body of Government plays the
central role in policy formulation and coordination with the assistance of the secretariat staff.
The main functions of the Council of Ministers can be categorized as:

(a) Determination of strategic priorities

(b) Formulation of work plan
(c) Discussion and decisions on major issues of intrinsic and political significance
(d) Effective communication with the Legislature, the people and the public
(e) Coherent and coordinated decision making backed by the requisite legal, financial, and
personnel resources to facilitate implementation of the policy, reconciling competing claims and
interests of different ministries.
(f) Ensuring equitable, efficient, effective and ethical implementation of policy and service
delivery

It is the prerogative of the Chief Minister to choose the members constituting his Cabinet. The
ministers constituting the Council are collectively responsible for its decisions and stand or fall
together. The number of members of the Council of Ministers shall not exceed 15% of the
strength of the Legislature, by virtue of which the size of the Council of Ministers in Andhra
Pradesh shall not exceed 43. Currently there are 25 Ministers in the Council including the Chief
Minister with almost all ministers holding temporarily charge of additional portfolios, indicating
possible expansion within the set limit.

The current allocation of portfolios among the ministers in the Andhra Pradesh Council of
Ministers is as shown below:

Current List of Ministerial Portfolios - 2005

S No Minister For Portfolio

1 Chief Minister General Administration, Law &
Order and all other portfolios not
allotted
2 Information & Public Relations Information, Public Relations,
Energy, Coal
3 Panchayat Raj Panchayat Raj
Endowments
4 Minority Welfare Minorities Welfare, Waqf, Urdu
Academy and Fisheries
Public Enterprises
5 Tourism and Sugar Tourism Sugar
Major Industries, Commerce and
Export Promotion
6 Home Home, Jails, Fire Services, Sainik
Welfare, Housing

11
S No Minister For Portfolio
7 Major Irrigation Major Irrigation Medium Irrigation
8 Cooperation Cooperation Transport
9 Lift Irrigation Lift Irrigation, Irrigation
Development Corporation, Ground
Water, Rain Shadow Area
Development, Printing Stationery
10 Revenue Revenue, Relief and Rehabilitation,
Youth Services
11 Agriculture Agriculture Horticulture, Food,
Civil Supplies, Legal Metrology,
Consumer Affairs
12 School Education School Education, Adult Education,
Libraries, Archaeology, Museum
and Archives, Women Development,
Child Welfare and Disabled Welfare
13 Commercial Taxes Commercial Taxes, Excise,
Prohibition, Law and Courts
14 Roads and Buildings Roads and Buildings, Ports
15 Municipal Administration and Urban Municipal Administration and
Development Urban Development, Sericulture
16 Social Welfare Social Welfare, Tribal Welfare
17 Finance Finance, Legislative Affairs,
Planning, Small Savings and
Lotteries, Health, Medical and
Family Welfare
18 Mines and Geology Mines and Geology, Infrastructure
& Investment and Information
Technology and Communications
19 Marketing Marketing
20 Sports and Cultural Affairs Sports and Cultural Affairs,
Cinematography
21 Rural Development Rural Development, Water Supply
and Employment Generation, B C
Welfare and Urban Land Ceiling
22 Animal Husbandry and Dairy Development Animal Husbandry and Dairy
Development, Warehousing
23 Higher Education Higher Education, Technical
Education ITIs
24 Forest and Environment Forest, Environment and Science &
Technology, Minor Irrigation
25 Labour and Employment Labour and Employment,
Handlooms and Textiles, Spinning
Mills, Khadi & Village Industries
Board

12
The total number of ministers can have a bearing on the number of departments in the secretariat
in so far as the creation of new departments may be considered expedient in order to
accommodate the number, even though such a practice is not resorted to in this State. There is a
growing realization of the importance of correlating the number of ministers and the number of
ministries (departments in the case of Andhra Pradesh) and the integration of functions within
each ministry creating internal cohesion. There is however no direct link in Andhra Pradesh
between the number of ministers and the number of departments. Luckily the present Chief
Minister has retained only the General Administration Department in his charge and has not kept
any sectoral portfolio to himself freeing himself of a lot of routine pressure which would
otherwise have had to engage his attention. The compulsions of coalition politics at the Centre
has necessitated regrouping of ministries and departments to facilitate allocation of subjects to
members of all the constituent coalition parties.

A Minister could be a Cabinet Minister, a Minister of State in independent charge or otherwise,

or a Deputy Minister. There could also be Parliamentary Secretaries to assist Ministers in the
discharge of their legislative business. Such a tyred structure, which is not the case in Andhra
Pradesh at present, has the advantage of inducting new talent in the Legislature into the
Executive at junior levels to enable them to gain experience in the onerous responsibilities of a
Minister so that when he assumes independent charge of a ministry or a department he is in a
position to act without being misguided and provide leadership to the ministry. There have
been instances where newly inducted ministers without previous experience or expertise have
played into the hands of personal staff. Ordinarily it is only a Cabinet Minister who is entitled to
participate at a meeting of the Council. But there have been instances where by convention
Ministers of State have also been, as a matter of course, attending Cabinet meetings. There is a
practice, at times, of assigning relative seniority to the Ministers which incidentally facilitates the
senior being treated as the Minister in charge of that department where a department has more
than one minister in charge. As of now members of the present Council of Ministers in the State
have not been assigned such ranking, differential status or order of seniority; and all the ministers
participate in the deliberations of the Council.

The Chief Minister occupies a preeminent position among all ministers, by virtue of his being the
Head of the Government, having the right to choose his Ministers and chair the Cabinet
meetings. It has been the tradition on the part of Chief Ministers in the State to reserve for
himself all or most of the subjects assigned to the General Administration Department. This
apart it has often been the practice to keep a couple of sectoral portfolios in his charge. Thus the
Chief Minister combines in himself the offices of the Chief Minister, Minister in charge of
General Administration, Minister in charge of sectoral portfolios specifically retained by him if
any, and charge of residual subjects not allotted to any Minister in the Council. This is
mentioned here to indicate the possibility of the Chief Minister being swarmed by day to day
problems of managing sectoral portfolios resulting in attendant pressures on his leadership and
coordination roles, diverting attention from core issues of crucial concern. The Chief Secretary,
by virtue of his being the head of the Civil Service, the Cabinet Secretary, and the administrative
head of the Secretariat and the Head of the General Administrative Department is assigned a
similar status among secretaries to Government. The secretaries to Government assist the
ministers in the discharge of his functions. As the designation indicates a secretary to

13
Government is not a secretary to the minister but to the Government, emphasizing his whole of
Government responsibilities.

Allocation and Transaction of Business

Under Article 166 all Executive action of the Government of a State shall be expressed to be
taken in the name of the Governor, who shall make Rules for the convenient transaction of
business of Government of a State and for the allocation, among the ministers of the said
business, in so far as it is not business with respect to which the Governor is, by or under the
Constitution, required to act in his discretion. In exercise of the powers conferred by Clauses of
2 and 3 of Article 166 of the Constitution, the Governor of Andhra Pradesh has made The
Andhra Pradesh Government Business Rules to regulate the transaction of business of the
Government. It deals with allocation and disposal of business; procedure of the Council of
Ministers; and departmental disposal of business, including consultation with Finance, Law,
General Administration (Services) and Public Enterprises Departments. The Governor has also
issued, under Rule 58 of the said Rules, The Andhra Pradesh Government Secretariat
Instructions to regulate the procedure to be followed for the circulation of files, undertake
legislation and matters connected therewith. In terms of these Rules the business of the State
Government shall be transacted in the departments specified in the first schedule to the rules and
shall be classified and distributed between those departments as laid down therein. This follows
the scheme of the seventh schedule of the Constitution under Article 246 which lists 97 subjects
in the Union list, 66 subjects in the States jurisdiction, and 47 subjects in the concurrent list in
respect of which both the Parliament and the State legislature have concurrent jurisdiction to
legislate subject to the Central legislation prevailing in the event of a conflict. Correspondingly
subjects in the charge of each department are listed in Schedule I of the Rules under the heads
State List, Concurrent List and Union List. Under Rule 5 the Governor, on the advice of the
Chief Minister, allots the business of the Government among the Ministers by assigning subjects
in one or more departments of the secretariat to the charge of a Minister. However it shall be
open to assign one department to the charge of more than one Minister, in which case the senior
of the two will be in administrative charge of the department in respect of establishment and
related matters of that department.

Allocation of work of Ministers to Officers

Rule 22 of the Business Rules stipulates that departmental business shall be disposed of by or
under the authority of minister in charge, who may, by means of standing orders, give such
direction as he thinks fit for the disposal of the cases in the department. He shall lay down, by
means of standing orders, the matters or classes of matters to be brought to his personal notice
and matters which may be disposed of at the level of secretary of the department concerned.
General experience is that such delegations are rare. This provision is crucial and determines the
way the business of Government within the charge of a department is carried on and the manner
in which power is exercised within the department.

14
References of Cases to Chief Minister

The Business Rules also provide details of matters that are required to be referred to the Chief
Minister and cases which shall be referred to the Governor by the Chief Minister. These ensure
the operational primacy of the Chief Minister vis--vis the members of his Cabinet.

Cabinet Committees

For convenient transaction of business in the Council and to arrive at informed decisions after
consultation and due deliberation it has been the practice often to constitute sub-committees of
the Council, at the discretion of the Chief Minister, or committees of group of Ministers to
examine and make recommendations on subjects specified. The Secretary to Government of the
department to which the subject belongs is nominated as the convener of such a group. An
illustrative list of groups of ministers which stand constituted currently is appended. An adhoc
though significant, amendment that has been introduced in regard to departmental disposal of
business relates to delegation of decision making power to specific boards like the State
Investment Promotion Board, and the State Tourism Promotion Board, by adding a proviso to
Rule 26 by virtue of this proviso it shall not be necessary to refer a subject which concerns more
than one department for consideration of all the departments concerned before issue of orders
where such a matter has been considered and decided by either of these boards. Under Rule 9
cases considered by the State level Coordination Committee dealing with Agriculture and
Irrigation presided by the Chief Minister are not required to be brought before the Council. The
proviso empowers the department to issue final orders in anticipation of approval of the Council,
in the event the subject is required to go before it, in accordance with the decisions taken by the
said boards straight away without examination of such matters, based on the minutes of the
meeting communicated by the concerned department in charge of the board, dispensing with
further consultations or approval of the ministers. In the event the matter falls within the ambit
of the council it is required to be placed before it for ratification only.

Subjects to be brought before Cabinet

Subjects which are required to be brought before the Cabinet are listed in the 2nd schedule to the
Rules by virtue of which it shall be the responsibility of the Department in the terms of Rule 9
and Section II of the Rules (i.e. Rule 15 to Rule 21). The Chief Secretary to Government who is
the head of the Civil Service acts as the Secretary to the Council of Minister of the State
Government, as in the case with Cabinet Secretary at the Centre. Under Rule 14 it is permissible
to have either the Chief Secretary or such other officer as the Chief Minister may appoint as the
Secretary to the Council. The pattern obtaining in the State is more conducive to unified
command and control while it may affect the extent of attention and detail one can devote to
individual issues going before the Council.

Allocation of Subjects to Departments

Criteria that are widely adopted for division of existing functions and allocation to ministries or
departments and for creation of new departments as the case may be include:

15
i) Grouping of organically linked subjects avoiding unrelated subjects or diverse activities and
duplication and overlap of functions;
ii) Ensuring a structure that provides appropriate vertical accountability and clear span of
control;
iii) Structure that avoids conflict of interest;
iv) Creating departments to administer functions largely new to the Government;
v) Departments to reflect priority medium term objectives of the Government;
vi) Focusing on client groups or what are called population ministries with accent on service
delivery;
vii) To facilitate greater technical efficiency or economy or better coordination; and
viii) Enabling strategic policy coordination in coordinating departments leaving sectoral policy
initiatives with respective ministries etc.

Andhra Pradesh Secretariat over the Years

Reorganization of secretariat as a consequence of creation of Andhra State resulted in the
secretariat comprising the following nine departments viz., (i) Public (ii) Finance (iii) Law (iv)
Revenue (v) Home (vi) Agriculture (vii) Health, Education and Local Administration (viii)
Industries, Labour and Cooperation (xi) Public Works. The Andhra Pradesh Secretariat upon
merger of Andhra and Hyderabad had eleven departments as follows:
i) General Administration
ii) Finance
iii) Law
iv) Planning and Local Administration
v) Revenue
vi) Home
vii) Agriculture
viii) Industries
ix) Health, Housing and Municipal Administration
x) Education
xi) Public Works
In the year 1964-65 the department of Panchayat Raj was added. The departments of Irrigation
and Power, Command Area Development, and Legislature Departments were added by 1975.
By 1979 the Secretariat got further expanded. The Finance and Planning department was split
into two departments. In addition the departments of Labour Employment and Technical
Education, Social Welfare and Forest and Rural Development were created. The position in
1976 was as under:

16
 List of Departments in Andhra Pradesh Government Secretariat-1976

S No Secretariat Department No Of Directorates / Other

Agencies Under the
Department
1 General Administration Department 11
2 Finance and Planning (Finance Wing) Department 3
3 Finance and Planning (Planning Wing) Department 1
4 Law Department 1
5 Legislature Department 0
6 Revenue Department 13
7 Home Department 8
8 Panchayat Raj Department 4
9 Education Department 21
10 Health, Housing and Municipal Administration 6
Department
11 Food and Agriculture Department 11
12 Forests and Rural Development Department 6
13 Employment and Social Welfare Department 15
14 Irrigation and Power Department 9
15 Irrigation and Power (Projects) Department 4
16 Command Area Development Department 4
17 Transport, Roads and Building Department 5
18 Industries and Commerce Department 20
Total 142

By the beginning of the 1980s Health and Social Welfare departments got separated and became
independent departments on their own.

In the Year 1994 the Secretariat comprised the following departments under which the number of
field agencies increased substantially to around 197.

List of Departments in Andhra Pradesh Government Secretariat 1994

S No Secretariat Department No Of Directorates / Other

Agencies Under the
Department
1 General Administration Department 12
2 Finance and Planning (Fin. Wing) Department 4
3 Finance and Planning (Plg. Wing) Department 1
4 Finance and Planning (Project Wing) Department 0
5 Law Department 3
6 Legislature Secretariat Department 0
7 Revenue Department 15
8 Home Department 10

17
 9 Education Department 22
10 Dept. of Tourism and Culture, Sports and Youth 7
Services Departments
11 Irrigation, Utilization and Command Area 15
Development Department
12 Minorities Welfare Department 3
13 Social Welfare Department 11
14 Women Development and Child Welfare 10
Department
15 Agriculture and Cooperative Department 11
16 Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Department 4
17 Food and Civil Supplies Department 3
18 Municipal Administration and Urban Development 5
Department
19 Housing Department 4
20 Health, Medical and Family Welfare Department 14
21 Industries and Commerce Department 26
22 Panchayat and Rural Development Department 5
23 Transport, Roads and Buildings Department 3
24 Energy, Forest Department 7
25 Environment, Science and Technology Department 4
Total 197

At the turn of the century ie in 2001, the position of departments in secretariat and number of
heads of departments was as follows:

S No Secretariat Department No Of Directorates /

Other Agencies Under
the Department

1 Agriculture and Cooperation 23

2 Animal Husbandry, Dairy Dev. And Fisheries 7
3 Backward Class Welfare 5
4 School Education 13
5 Higher Education 23
6 Energy 10
7 Environment, Forests and S&T 6
8 Finance 6
9 Food, CS and CA (Ex-Officio Sec.) 4
10 General Administration 19
11 Health, Medical and FW 22
12 Home 6
13 Housing 4
14 Industries and Commerce 20
15 IT and C 1

18
 16 I & CAD 22
17 LE & TF 6
18 Law 7
19 Minorities Welfare 6
20 MA & UD 13
21 PR & RD 9
22 Planning 3
23 Public Enterprises -
24 Revenue 13
25 Social Welfare 11
26 TR & B 10
27 WDCW & A 8
28 YA & TC 14
Total 291

Present Composition of Secretariat

Presently there are, as at the end of December 2005, 31 departments in the A P Secretariat
including the Legislature Secretariat as follows:

List of Departments in Andhra Pradesh Government Secretariat 2005

S No Name of the Department

1 Agriculture and Cooperation Department
2 Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development and Fisheries Department
3 Backward Classes Welfare Department
4 Education Department : (a) Higher Education
(b) School Education
5 Environment, Forests, Science and Technology Department
6 Energy Department
7 Finance Department
8 Planning Department
9 Finance (Works & Projects) Department
10 Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies Department
11 General Administration Department
12 Health, Medical and Family Welfare Department
13 Home Department
14 Housing Department
15 Industries and Commerce Department
16 Department of Information Technology and Communications
17 Infrastructure and Investment Department
18 Irrigation and Command Area Development (a) Irrigation Wing Department
(b) Projects Wing Department
19 Law Department
20 Labour, Employment, Training and Factories Department

19
 21 Legislature Department
22 Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department
23 Minorities Welfare Department
24 Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department
25 Public Enterprises Department
26 Rain Shadow Area Development Department
27 Revenue Department
28 Social Welfare Department
29 Transport, Roads and Buildings Department
30 Women Development and Child Welfare Department
31 Youth Advancement, Tourism and Culture Department

Size of Secretariat in Other States

Comparison of the number of departments in the secretariat in Andhra Pradesh with a few of
neighbouring states will indicate the relative position. The Tamil Nadu Secretariat today
comprises 35 departments as shown below.

List of Departments in Tamil Nadu Secretariat 2005

S No Department S No Department
1 Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare 19 Labour and Employment
2 Agriculture 20 Law
3 Animal Husbandry & Fisheries 21 Legislative Assembly
4 BC, MBC & Minorities Welfare 22 Municipal Administration and Water
Supply
5 Co-operation, Food and Consumer 23 Personnel and Administrative Reforms
Protection
6 Commercial Taxes 24 Planning, Development and Special
Initiatives
7 Energy 25 Prohibition and Excise
8 Environment and Forests 26 Public
9 Finance 27 Public Works
10 Handlooms, Handicrafts, Textiles 28 Revenue
and Khadi
11 Health and Family Welfare 29 Rural Development
12 Higher Education 30 School Education
13 Highways 31 Small Industries
14 Home 32 Social Welfare and Nutritious Meal
Programme
15 Housing and Urban Development 33 Transport
16 Industries 34 Tamil Development Culture &
Religious Endows.
17 Information and Tourism 35 Youth Welfare and Sports Development
18 Information Technology

20
As against this the Government of Madhya Pradesh has the following 51 departments.

List of Departments in Madhya Pradesh Secretariat 2005

S No Department S No Department
1. 20 Point Implementation 27 Parliamentary Affairs
2. Aviation 28 Public Grievances & Redressal
3. Bio Diversity & Bio Technology 29 Public Relations
4. Commerce & Industry 30 Religious Trust & Endowments
5. Finance 31 SC & ST Welfare
6. Forest 32 Social Welfare
7. Home 33 Tourism
8. Jail 34 Water Resources
9. Medical Education 35 Animal Husbandry & Dairy
10. Panchayat & Rural Development 36 Bhopal Gas Tragedy Relief &
Rehabilitation
11. Public Enterprises 37 Cooperation
12. Public Health & Family Welfare 38 Energy
13. Rehabilitation 39 Food, Civil Supplies & Consumer
Protection
14. Rural Industries 40 Higher Education
15. Science & Technology 41 Information Technology
16. Technical Education & Manpower 42 Law & Legislative Affairs
Planning
17. Urban Administration & 43 Narmada Valley Development
Development
18. Agriculture 44 Planning & Economics & Statistics
19. Backward Classes & Minorities 45 Public Health Engineering
Welfare
20. Commercial Tax 46 Public Works (PWD)
21. Culture 47 Revenue
22. Fisheries 48 School Education
23. General Administration 49 Sports & Youth Welfare
24. Housing & Environment 50 Transport
25. Labour 51 Women & Child Development
26. Mineral Resources

21
When compared to Madhya Pradesh, the number of departments in Maharashtra is almost half of
its strength as can be seen below:

List of Departments in Maharashtra Secretariat 2005

S Department S Department
No No
1 General Administration 14 Tribal Development Department
Department
2 Home Department 15 Environment Department
3 Revenue and Forests Department 16 Co-operation and Textiles
Department
4 Agriculture and ADF 17 Higher and Technical Education
Department Department
5 School Education Department 18 Women and Child Development
Department
6 Urban Development Department 19 Water Supply and Sanitation
Department
7 Finance Department 20 Employment and Self-employment
Department
8 Public Works Department 21 Medical Education and Drugs
Department
9 Irrigation Department 22 Public Health Department
10 Law and Judiciary Department 23 Social Justice, Sports and Special
Assistance Department
11 Industries, Energy and Labour 24 Planning Department
Department
12 Rural Development Department 25 Legislative Affairs Department
13 Food, Civil Supplies and 26 Housing and Special Assistance
Consumer Protection Department
Department

Sub Departments within Departments

The number of departments which at the time of formation of Andhra Pradesh was eleven,
increased to eighteen in 1976, to 19 in 1982 growing further substantially to 25 in 1994 bringing
the present number to 31. There has been parallel growth in the number of secretaries to
Government in a single department giving up the original concept of a department being in the
sole charge of a secretary. Thus today the number of secretaries (including Principal Secretaries
and Special Chief Secretaries) in a department ranges from one in departments like Legislature,
Women Development, School Education, etc to four in Finance, five in the Revenue Department
and going up to a maximum of eight in the General Administration Department. Not only the
number but also the official ranking and grade of an officer in the post of a secretary to

22
Government have been going up over time. Today the position of a secretary to Government is
occupied not only by officers in the grade of suppertime scale of IAS but also two grades above
it viz., that of Principal Secretary and Special Chief Secretary with the same salary and rank as
Chief Secretary. There are 64 officers occupying the position of a secretary to Government of
which 7 are of the rank of Special Chief Secretary, 31 of Principal Secretary and the remaining
of secretary level. A department-wise abstract statement depicting this position is given below:

Department-Wise Statistics of Senior Civil Servants

S No Name of Department No of Senior Officers & Grade

CS Pril. Secy. Total
Secy
1 GAD 4 3 1 8
2 DPE 1 1
3 Revenue 1 1 3 5
4 Finance 1 1 2 4
5 Finance Works and Projects 1 1
6 Planning Department 1 1
7 IT and C 2 2
8 Home 1 1 2
9 Agriculture and Cooperation 3 3
10 Rain Shadow Area Development Dept. 1 1
11 FCS and CA 1 1
12 AHDD & F 2 2
13 Industries and Commerce 1 1 2
14 Infrastructure and Investment 1 1
15 Social Welfare 2 2
16 Energy 1 1
17 Backward Class Welfare 1 1
18 Education 1 1
19 Higher Education 1 1
20 TR & B 1 1 2
21 Health, Medical and Family Welfare 2 1 3
22 MA & UD 2 2
23 Housing 1 1
24 Panchayat Raj and Rural Development 2 2
25 I & CAD 2 1 3
26 LE & TF 1 1
27 WDCW & DW 1 1
28 Environment Forest and S & T 1 1 2
29 Minorities Welfare 1 1
30 YA&TC 2 2
31 Law 2 2
32 Legislature 2 1
Total 7 31 26 64

23
The details of the autonomous wings or sub departments in the 31 departments with the present
designations of secretary level officers in charge of them enable clear appreciation of the actual
number of reporting units of the Secretariat. In a manner of speaking there are in Andhra
Pradesh 64 departments for all intents and purposes.

S No Name of Department Sub Department

1 General Administration Department 1) Chief Secretary to Government

2) Special Chief Secretary - Governance, Public
Management and Administrative Reforms
3) Spl. Chief Secretary to Govt. Services
4) Chief Electoral Officer & Ex-Officio Special
Chief Secretary - Elections
5) Director General, Vigilance & Enforcement &
Ex-Officio Principal Secretary Vigilance
6) Principal Secretary to Govt. Political
7)Principal Secretary to Govt. Remote &
Interior Areas Development, Coordination
8) Secretary to Govt. Accommodation

2 Department of Public Enterprises Principal Secretary to Government

3 Revenue Department 1) Special Chief Secretary to Government -

Revenue
2) Principal Secretary to Government - Taxation
3) Secretary to Government - Endowments
4) Secretary to Government -
5) Commissioner Disaster Management & Ex-
Officio Secretary to Government

4 Finance Department Special Chief Secretary to Government

Principal Secretary to Government R&E
Secretary to Government FP
Secretary to Government IF

5 Finance (Works & Projects) Dept. Principal Secretary to Government

6 Planning Department Principal Secretary to Government

7 Information, Technology & Secretary to Government

Communication Department Secretary to Government IT

8 Home Department 1) Principal Secretary to Government

2) Special Chief Secretary to Government
9 Agriculture & Cooperation Dept. 1) Principal Secretary to Government -

24
 Agriculture
2) APC & Principal Secretary to Government-
Horti. & Seri.
3) Principal Secretary to Government - Coop. &
Mktg

10 Rain Shadow Areas Dev. Dept. Secretary to Government

11 Food, Civil Supplies & Consumer Commissioner Civil Supplies & EO Secretary
Affairs Department to Government

12 Animal Husbandry, Dairy 1) Principal Secretary to Government

Development & Fisheries Dept. 2) Principal Secretary to Government -Fisheries

13 Industries & Commerce Department 1) Principal Secretary to Government & CIP

2) Secretary to Government - SSI

14 Infrastructure and Investment Dept. Principal Secretary to Government & CIP

15 Social Welfare Department 1) Principal Secretary to Government - SW

2) Principal Secretary to Government -TW

16 Energy Department Principal Secretary to Government

17 Backward Classes Welfare Dept. Principal Secretary to Government

18 Education Department 1) Principal Secretary to Government -HE

2) Secretary to Government -SE

19 Transport, Roads & Buildings Dept. 1) Principal Secretary to Government Roads

2) Secretary to Government - Buildings

20 Health, Medical & Family Welfare 1) Principal Secretary

Department 2) Principal Secretary to Government
3) Secretary to Government

21 Municipal Administration & Urban 1) Secretary to Government

Development Department 2) Secretary to Government

22 Housing Department Secretary to Government

23 Panchayat Raj & Rural 1) Principal Secretary to Government -PR &

Development Department RWS
2) Principal Secretary to Government -RD

25
 24 Irrigation & Command Area 1) Principal Secretary to Government -Irrigation
Development Department 2) Principal Secretary to Government
3) Secretary to Government - Projects

25 Labour, Employment, Training & Principal Secretary to Government

Factories Department

26 Women Development, Child Principal Secretary to Government

Welfare & Disabled Welfare Dept.

27 Environment, Forests, Science & 1) Principal Secretary to Government

Technology Department 2) Special Secretary to Government

28 Minorities Welfare Department Secretary to Government

29 Youth Advancement, Tourism & 1) Secretary to Government - Tourism

Culture Department 2) Secretary to Government -YS & Sports

30 Law Department 1) Secretary -Legal Affairs

2) Secretary to Government -Legislative Affairs
and Justice

31 Legislature Department 1) Secretary to Legislature

2) Officer on Special Duty

In 1961 the Secretariat in all had 151 gazetted and 1803 non-gazetted employees. The position
as on 1.1.2002 as reflected in the last quinquinnial census indicates that there were 813 gazetted
officers in the secretariat with 3039 non-gazetted and other employees. This shows a more than
five fold increase in the number of gazetted officers while the increase in the non-gazetted staff
was only double.

Wings of Secretariat

The functions of the centre of Government comprising the Secretariat can be listed as policy
formulation, planning, programming, budgeting, coordination, communication, legislation,
regulation and oversight of service delivery by field agencies, external relations with outside
bodies, monitoring, feedback, evaluation and interest arbitration. The secretariat departments
can be divided into two distinct categories viz., Nodal / Coordinating Departments and Sectoral
Departments. Sectoral departments could in turn be primarily in charge of regulation or service
delivery or a combination of both. It would be difficult to categorize them to watertight
compartments however.

26
Sector / Subject Departments

The remaining departments which are referred to as line ministries in the UK, can be called
sectoral departments in charge of implementation of policy in relation to distinct subjects
involving service delivery or in charge of territorial development or targeting service delivery of
specific client (population) groups. Distinct major sectors can be roughly identified from among
these groups viz.,

i) Regulatory Departments like Home; Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs;
Labour and Employment;
ii) Agriculture sector comprising Agriculture and Cooperation; Animal Husbandry,
Fisheries, Dairy Development; Irrigation;
iii) Industrial sector covering Industry and Commerce; Energy; Information and
Communication Technologies
iv) Infrastructure comprising Infrastructure and Investment; Transport; Roads &
Buildings, Irrigation (Projects Wing); Rural and Urban Development
v) Social Services like Health; School Education; Higher Education; Technical
Education
vi) Welfare Services which comprise the departments of Social Welfare, Backward
Classes Welfare, Minorities Welfare, Women Development & Child Welfare and
Youth Affairs

Coordinating Departments

The nodal, cross cutting, coordinating departments in the secretariat can be grouped as follows:

i) General Administration,
ii) Finance Department,
iii) Planning Department,
iv) Public Enterprises,
v) Information, Communication Technology Department, (to the extent of E-
governance)
vi) Law and Legislative Affairs Department, and Legislative Department,
vii) Legislature Secretariat

Inter Departmental Consultation

The Rules provide for inter departmental consultations for the disposal of business which
concern more than one department. The rules provide in particular, for consultation with the
Finance department in respect of matters involving financial implication, General Administration
Department in respect of matters of policy, clarification or amendments or relaxation of service
rules, and the Public Enterprises Department in respect of general policy or those involving
general guidelines, or relating to release of funds to public enterprise. It has the responsibility
for disinvestments which has assumed major significance by virtue of structural adjustment
obligations. Such consultation would also arise with Planning Department on five year plan and

27
the annual plan and the Law Department for legal advise, interpretation of rules or law, framing
of rules, drafting of bills, other legislature business and even vetting of draft agreements, orders
etc. Section III B & C of the Rules deal with the role of and procedure for dealing with the
Finance Department and the Law Department respectively. These are provisions which deal
with the manner of transaction of departments business where horizontal coordination with the
other departments of Government is involved. The frequency and extent of consultations
requiring concurrence of Finance and GA (Services) Departments depend on the concentration of
power in these departments.

General Administration Department

The core of the coordinating departments of the Secretariat in Andhra Pradesh is the General
Administration Department which is charged with the primary responsibility, among others, of
providing direct assistance and advice to the Head of the Government viz., the Chief Minister
and the Council of Ministers. The General Administration Department is first and foremost the
Cabinet Secretariat assisting the CM and the Cabinet. With a few exceptions General
Administration Department is in the direct charge of the Chief Minister. In Andhra Pradesh it
combines in itself functions categorized as follows:

a) Cabinet Secretariat
b) Logistical Support to Ministers and Secretariat
c) Governance, Public Management and Administrative Reforms
d) Personnel Management (Services)
e) Political (law and order and security)
f) Vigilance and Enforcement
g) Administrative Coordination
h) Communication (Information and Public Relations)
i) Shared Services
j) Legislative Coordination
k) Centre State Relations
l) Liaison with the Governors Secretariat
m) Conduct of Elections

All the above subjects except Information and Public Relations are subjects in the direct charge
of the Chief Minister at present.

As a Cabinet office the General Administration Department has responsibility for:

a) Periodic conduct of sessions of the Council of Ministers including finalization of the agenda
and distribution of papers, issue of notice for meetings, recording and communication of
decisions duly observing and ensuring compliance of all legal, budgetary, financial and other
procedural formalities;
b) Communication of decisions to the media and the public;
c) Securing action taken reports on the decisions and placing it for review of Cabinet;
d) Overseeing the conduct of meetings of groups of Ministers and Cabinet Committees and
submission of recommendations to the Cabinet;
e) Coordination with Head of State, Legislature and the Centre;

28
f) Resolution of inter departmental disputes and ensuring inter departmental coordination and
policy coherence through adhoc meetings, secretaries committees and routing of files through the
Chief Secretary to Government;
g) Coordination of monitoring of Government performance;
h) Strict observance of the provisions of the Business Rules and secretariat instructions dealing
with the transaction of the business of Government; and
i) Assisting the Chief Ministers in the discharge of his duties as the Head of Government.

All proposals required to go before the Cabinet have to be routed through the Chief Secretary to
the Chief Minister for approval. Further under Rule 29 important cases involving adoption of
new principles, new schemes and proposals for amendments to existing Service Rules and
practices have to be submitted to the ministers concerned through the Chief Secretary to
Government. Chief Secretary is the custodian of the Business Rules and any question of the
interpretation of the Rules or in respect of the jurisdiction of a department shall be referred to the
Chief Secretary. All proposals for in respect of senior appointments shall go through him under
Instruction 11. Chief Secretary has the power to call for papers and files relating to any case in
any department.

In Andhra Pradesh Chief Secretary to Government is the administrative head of the General
Administration Department and the administrative secretariat in general. By virtue of office he
is the Secretary of the Council. He also occupies the position of the head of the Civil Service of
the State. Thus he becomes the most crucial link between the officialdom and the Chief Minister
and the Cabinet performing a semi political role, while at the same time ensuring
operationalization of the manifesto and avowed policies of the party in power, while striving to
secure neutrality of the civil servant and to see that public interest remains paramount
consideration of the Public Service in his charge.

Finance Department

Finance Department can be said to be the second coordinating department of crucial importance
to all other departments in so far as it is in charge of budgeting, fiscal and financial matters, the
treasury, and pay and accounts offices, financial Rules, procedures and propriety, accounts,
institutional finance, regulation of pay and allowances and other financial conditions of service
of public servants. The transaction of business in the secretariat in so far as it has a bearing on
finances of the State shall be transacted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 11 and 37 to
40. In accordance with these provisions no matter in which the Finance department or the
Finance Minister is concerned can be transacted by the department or placed before the Council
of Ministers without consultation with them. No funds can be drawn from the treasury without
requisite sanction or delegation of powers and no reappropriation except that authorized by the
Finance Department by a general or special order can be done by any department. Departments
are not permitted to sub-delegate powers delegated to them by Finance Department without prior
concurrence. No orders affecting the finances of the State involving grant of any land or
assignment of revenue or concession, grant or other rights or orders that involve relinquishment
of revenue can be issued by the departments without prior consultation. Strict financial control is
exercised by the Government in relation to sanction or abolition of posts and sanction of
financial incentives. Strict expenditure control is exercised by the Finance Department except in

29
respect of pay and allowances and routine expenditure. Release of funds and cash flows are also
subjected to exigencies of ways and means by the Finance Department. Finance (Works and
Projects) Department (even though so called) functions as an independent department in relation
to expenditure control of works departments subject to the overall guidance of the Finance
Department.

Planning Department

Planning Department which was hitherto part of the integrated Finance and Planning Department
for long has now been bifurcated from it and given independent status as a separate department.
In so far as this department is in charge of formulation, monitoring and review of annual plan
and five year plans, this department can be categorized as one among the coordinating
departments. It has also responsibility for decentralized planning, formulation of district plans
and preparation and monitoring of district credit plans, oversight of district planning committees
and metropolitan planning committees (which are yet to be constituted in terms of the
constitutional amendments) and district development and review committee. In addition it has
responsibility for preparation and monitoring of external aided projects and special programmes
like 20 Point programme, MP LAD scheme, etc. It is in charge of statistical database through the
Directorate of Economics and Statistics. Among its mandates include manpower studies,
manpower planning, training, project appraisal, evaluation studies of plan schemes, regional
perspective plans, and economic advice, many of which remain on paper only. In terms of
Instruction 36 of the Secretariat Instructions contained in Part-2 of the Rules - all proposals
relating to sanction of continuance of ongoing schemes, new plan schemes including centrally
sponsored schemes and for release of funds to Public Enterprises should be placed before the
Departmental Clearance Committee for Plan Schemes, Project and Programme Approval
Committee and Committee for Release of Funds for Public Enterprises respectively for clearance
before sanction. Any change or deviation from a plan scheme or a provision needs approval of
the planning department.

Public Enterprises Department

Public Enterprise Department which was hitherto the part of the General Administration
Department, dealing with general issues of policy and public enterprise management including
privatization, disinvestment and winding up, in respect of public enterprises under all
departments of various descriptions including companies, cooperatives and societies, with an
Implementation Secretariat receiving consultancy from an International Consultancy
Organization under DFID assistance. All departments are required to consult this department in
respect of matters coming within its purview.

I T & C Department

IT & C Department, in charge of comprehensive development of information technology in the

State, partly also deals with the coordinating function of technology upgradation of the
departments, creation of organizational structures for policy formulation and implementation,
establishment of broad band digital connectivity up to the village level including Rajiv Internet
Villages Kiosks and eGovernance initiatives comprising projects like A P SWAN, AP SCAN,

30
MPHS, CARD, VIDEO Conferencing, Secretariat Knowledge and Information Management
System, eSeva, Computerization and Intranet and Internet connectivity of departments of
Government throughout the State. The other part of the function of the department relates to
information technology, industry and infrastructure development and computer education in the
State. Thus this is the latest entrant into the category of coordinating departments.

Law Department

The Law Department, which in a nut shell, is responsible for all matters connected with drafting
legislation including subordinate legislation, ensuring legal conformity of actions of Government
through legal advise to departments, assistance in matters involving Government litigation and
matters connected with judiciary and law officers. The Business Rules 41 to 54 and Instructions
22 to 30 deals with consultation in respect of legislations. Under Rule 55 Law Department is
required to be consulted to issue a statutory rule, notification or order, authorize issue of sanction
for issuing any rule, by law or an order by a subordinate authority or where a statutory rule,
notification or order is proposed to be referred to the Centre unless they are of routine or a
repetitive nature. Rule 56 similarly requires consultation in respect of doubts or clarifications
relating to statute, acts, regulations, rules, orders etc general legal principles arising in any case
and involving institution or withdrawal of any prosecution at the instance of any department.

Legislature Department

The Legislature Secretariat, directly subordinate to the Hon. Speaker, has a special position
among the departments categorized as secretariat departments, is also a coordinating department
which assists the Legislature in its business and its relations with the Executive including
securing Executive accountability to the Legislature, through the mechanism like the Legislature
Committees.

Official Hierarchy in the Secretariat

Each department of the secretariat shall consist of a Secretary to Government who shall be the
official head of that department, with such other officers and servants as may be required for the
disposal of business of that department, the lower levels of the department being that of a deputy
secretary, an assistant secretary and sections under a section officer with two assistant section
officers and a typist cum assistant. A secretary means and includes a Special Chief Secretary, a
Principal Secretary, a Special Secretary and also an officer of the above ranks in an ex-officio
capacity. This is the result of a mismatch between designation of the posts and the status of the
officers which incidentally points to the need for congruence. Similarly, the level of a deputy
secretary could be occupied by an officer of the rank of an additional or a joint secretary. The
officers are supported by Stenographers and Class IV Staff. Progressively the number of
departments with more than a secretary in charge of specified subjects within a department has
been steadily increasing as has already been indicated. The following is the secretariat hierarchy
of posts within each department.

31
 Special Chief Secretary / Principal Secretary / Secretary to Government
(Discharging the function of a Secretary)
Private Secretary ----------------

Additional Secretary / Joint Secretary / Deputy Secretary

(Discharging the function of a Circulating Officer)

Spl Cat / UD / LD Steno ----------------

Assistant Secretary

Section Officer

Assistant Section Officer

(two for each section)

Typist cum Assistant

Secretariat Personnel

The selection, appointment and continuance in Office of the Chief Secretary to Government is
the prerogative of the Chief Minister. He is ordinarily the senior most officer of the Indian
Administrative Service serving in connection with the affairs of the State. Posts of all Special
Chief Secretaries, Principle Secretaries and Secretaries to Government in the Secretariat (all of
whom are under the rules functionally secretaries) other than secretariat heads of the departments
of Home, Law, Legislature and Ex-officio secretaries are in variably, by convention and practice,
officers of the Indian Administrative Service. An I P S Officer is normally nominated as Home
Secretary. An exception is the case of a Special Secretary in the E F S & T Department, being an
officer of the I F S. Rarely have there been, in the recent past, any such officer belonging to
other All India or State services or from outside Public Service. Legislature Secretary is
ordinarily appointed from within the legislature secretariat and Secretary Law by tenure
appointment of a District Judge. The posts of additional secretaries, joint secretaries and deputy
secretaries (all of whom by virtue of Rules are functionally treated as deputy secretaries) forming
part of the Single Unit, other than in the departments of law, legislature and finance, are
apportioned as cadre posts earmarked for the officers of the Indian Administrative Service and
non-cadre posts to which officers belonging to the Andhra Pradesh Secretariat Service are
appointed. The Finance and Law departments are specialized units in which all posts of

32
additional secretaries and below are treated as separate units for purposes of appointments,
promotions and postings in accordance with the special rules governing these posts. Similar is
the case in respect of all posts in the Legislature secretariat.

Crucial Role of Chief Ministers Office

Before one proceeds to undertake a detailed examination of the composition, structure and
functions of the departments constituting the secretariat it would be advantageous to refer to the
role of the secretary to the Chief Minister in relation to the secretariat in general and the General
Administration Department in particular. The office of the secretary to Chief Minister is not a
department of the Government and he is not a secretary to Government by virtue of his office.
Chief Ministers Office assists him in discharging the multifarious functions of Government
apart from liaison with the Legislature and the Governor, external relations with the Centre and
other agencies and organizations and political liaison. In short the functions of this office could
be grouped under logistical support, political and policy advise, communications support, and
speech writing for the Head of Government. In some countries the functions of the Office of the
Head of Government and the Cabinet Secretariat are combined in one organization, but in our
system the two are distinct and separate, being linked only for administrative purposes and
effective liaison. Similarly the composition of the office also varies. It could be purely an office
manned by Civil Servants. It could be in addition assisted by political advisers and or political
appointees. In Andhra Pradesh there is no system of political advisers being appointed even
though there have been the cases of non civil servants occupying officers of advisers or officers
on special duty. It is desirable, to facilitate continuity through change of Governments to have a
core permanent element in the CMO to ensure institutional memory, continuity, acquaintance
with procedure and knowledge of policy in such a way that no dislocation of business is caused
by a change of Government resulting in wholesale replacement of personnel manning the office.

Before the 1970s the CMs Office was a miniscule, private and personal office comprising
purely of personal and security staff providing logistic support to the Chief Minister. Since
1970s the Chief Ministers office has begun expanding, starting with the appointment of a
Secretary to the Chief Minister to the present day when it has grown into a full fledged office
outside the secretariat hierarchy consisting of a Principal Secretary, Secretaries and
corresponding lower personnel not only assisting the Chief Minister but also progressively
acquiring significant strategic policy and public sector modernization functions and coordination.
Occasionally there have been cases of non civil servants being appointed as officers on special
duty and advisers in the Chief Ministers Office. A similar practice can be noticed in
commonwealth countries including the United Kingdom in a much more prominent and active
role. It is important to emphasize the point here that CMs office is not treated as a regular
department of Government Secretariat and still continues to be his private office attached to
the General Administration Department for administrative purposes. There was a period
however during the 1970s when the Secretary to Chief Minister functioned simultaneously as a
regular Secretary to Government in the General Administration Department in charge of six
point formula, coordination and Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes special cell reporting to the
Chief Minister.

33
The role of Prime Minister in a parliamentary system of Cabinet Government has been assuming
more and more dominance in some countries in the last couple of decades with the possibility of
a hybrid quasi presidential system emerging with its attendant characteristics of reduced
emphasis on the role of Cabinet, (which gave birth to the passing of the Cabinet Government
thesis), preeminent position of the Prime Minister, informal decision making mechanisms,
greater personalization of politics, with great focus and media attention on Prime Minister. For
example, in England, the focus of decision making has gradually shifted from the Cabinet to
Cabinet committees and 10 Downing Street has been assuming newer roles reducing
correspondingly the role of the Cabinet office. The Prime Ministers office in England is headed
by a Chief of Staff with responsibility for coordinating operations across Number 10 Downing
Street ranging from international diplomacy to policy making with a deputy, a Principal Private
Secretary to the Prime Minister, a Director Communications, Director Events, Visits and
Scheduling, a Director Political Operations, paid for by the party, a head of Policy Directorate
and a Director of Government Relations with a Chief Adviser on strategy.

The beginnings of the Prime Ministers office at the Centre can be traced to mid 1960s when for
the first time a Secretary to Prime Minister assumed office which has progressively grown in size
and responsibilities. This is not in consonance with the recommendation of the Administrative
Reforms Commission in 1968 when it recommended that the role of the Cabinet Secretary
should not be limited to that of a Coordinator that he should also act as the Principal Staff
Adviser to the Prime Minister, the Cabinet and the Cabinet Committee on the important policy
matters. Today the PMO is headed by a Principal Secretary to Prime Minister assisted by an
Additional Secretary and four Joint Secretaries and a number of Directors and Deputy
Secretaries. An Anti Corruption Unit and Public Wing dealing with grievances are also attached
to this office. Other offices attached to the PMO include the National Security Adviser with the
rank of Minister of State and a Media Adviser assisted by a Central Public Information Officer.
A criticism of the role of this office often heard is that it has assumed roles that eclipse the status
of the office of the Cabinet Secretary. It could thus be seen that there are common threads that
can be discerned in the trend towards an increasing role for the Office of the Chief Minister in
the light of what has been happening in England and at the Centre.

34
 Chapter 2

Analysis of Machinery at Work

An overview of the evolution and historical growth of the centre of Government viz., the
Secretariat in Andhra Pradesh established to lay down policy and oversee implementation in the
field, with a range of field agencies penetrating in layers right down to the village indicates how
the Government administrative structure has expanded manifold over time acquiring new
functions.

Proliferation of Departments

During the pre independence days there were only 9 departments of secretariat of which 3 were
coordinating, 3 regulatory and the remaining 3 development departments comprising
Development, Education & Health and Public Works. The number of departments upon
formation of Andhra Pradesh increased to a modest 11 with 4 coordinating, 2 regulatory and 5
development departments comprising Agriculture; Industries; Health, Housing and Municipal
Administration; Education and Public Works. There are today 31 departments, of which 7 are
coordinating, 4 regulatory and remaining development and welfare departments. This, by itself
does not complete the full picture.

Emergence of Sub Departments

Many of these departments have sub-departments within them, each headed by a secretary or an
officer of a higher rank. Starting with less than a dozen secretaries in as many departments
including the Chief Secretary to Government, today we have 63 officers in these 31 departments
of the rank of Secretary, Principal Secretary or Special Chief Secretary all discharging the
functions of a Secretary to Government within their respective span of control. The process of
fragmentation of departments can be appreciated better with specific examples in the Andhra
Pradesh context. Social Welfare Department was the only Welfare Department in 1982
bifurcated from the Employment and Social Welfare. Today we have, in order to reflect the
growing emphasis on welfare of specific population groups and to focus pointed attention on
their development and welfare, we now have the Department of Social Welfare (within which
there is a Tribal Welfare Sub Department), Backward Class Welfare; Minorities Welfare;
Women Development, Child Welfare and Disabled Welfare; and Youth Affairs and Tourism &
Culture looking after among others Youth Affairs thus constituting four different departments.

Thus it can be seen that the role and functions of Government and size and complexity of the
administrative apparatus serving the political Executive have developed incrementally and
expanded over the decades to embrace new regulatory, developmental, production, commercial
and service delivery functions in keeping with the growing aspirations of the citizen and
objectives of the Government in diverse sectors of economic, social, environmental, welfare etc
areas reflecting current priorities and keeping up with the technological advancements and
changing political environment and management context. This growth has been influenced by
value systems, law, politics and administration, political expediency, the head of Governments

35
personality and social and economic compulsions. Since independence it is also guided by goals
set by the Constitution and the political philosophy of the Government in power.

The following statement provides an overview of the secretariat departments with the categories
of personnel manning them including the number of basic sections constituting a secretariat
department.
Category-wise Strength of Posts in Secretariat 2005
S Name of Officers in Secretary AS,DS, AS Sections ASO
No Department and Above Grade JS Grade Grade / SO
CS Prl Secy Tot Officers Officer
Secy
1 GAD 4 3 1 8 14 27 70 136
2 DPE 1 - 1 1 1 5 10
3 Revenue 1 1 3 5 6 14 55 111
4 Finance 1 1 2 4 9 12 58 116
5 Finance W&P 1 - 1 2 10 19
6 Planning 1 - 1 4 4 22 43
7 IT & C - 2 2 1 - - -
8 Home 1 1 - 2 3 8 28 56
9 A and C 3 - 3 3 9 24 47
10 RSADD - 1 1 1 1 - -
11 FCS and CA - 1 1 - 1 4 8
12 AHDD & F 2 - 2 1 3 9 18
13 I and C 1 1 2 4 5 21 41
14 I and I 1 - 1 1 2 - -
15 SW 2 - 2 3 8 22 46
16 Energy 1 - 1 1 2 9 18
17 BCW 1 - 1 1 2 5 9
18 Education - 1 1 6 5 19 37
Higher Education 1 - 1 4 13 26
19 TR & B 1 1 2 2 5 21 43
20 HM & F W 2 1 3 3 6 21 43
21 MA & UD - 2 2 3 7 23 45
22 Housing - 1 1 1 2 8 16
23 PR &RD 2 - 2 8 11 48 96
24 I & CAD 2 1 3 6 8 28 56
Projects Wing 7 22 45
25 LE & TF 1 - 1 1 2 8 15
26 WDCW & DW 1 - 1 2 2 7 14
27 E F S&T 1 1 2 1 3 9 18
28 MW - 1 1 2 2 10 20
29 YA & TC - 2 2 2 2 8 16
30 Law - 2 2 12 7 14 28
31 Legislature - 2 2 5 10
Total 7 31 26 64 107 184 601 1196

36
It could be observed from this statement that where as there are 64 officers of the rank of
secretary and above whereas there are only 107 officers at the next lower level ie of deputy, joint
or additional secretary and 184 assistant secretaries which is indicative of overcrowding at the
top with 601 sections and nearly double the number of assistant section officers.

Extremes of Size of Departments

Focus on new and emerging functions and needs of particular population groups and special
problems of identified regions have contributed to the emergence of a number of small and at
times unviable departments with considerable overlaps side by side with continuous expansion of
old established departments of Government.

The following table depicting the number of sections and officers serving the departments of
secretariat throws light on the two extremes of size of the departments.

Number and Grades of Officers

S No Name of the Department Secy & AS,JS,DS AS Section

Above Officers /
Sections

1 General Administration Department 8 14 27 64

2 Revenue 4 6 14 55

3 Rain Shadow Area Development 1 1 1 5

Department

4 Public Enterprise Dept. 1 1 1 5

5 Infrastructure and Investment 1 1 2 -

The General Administration Department, being the core of the centre of Government, is
obviously the largest department under the senior most civil servants viz., the Chief Secretary
with 7 other officers of and above the rank of secretary to Government to assist him and serve
the Chief Minister and the Council of Ministers in the discharge of their functions. It has over
10% of the total number of 601 sections and nearly one sixth of the total number of assistant
secretaries in the secretariat. Revenue department which comes next in size also accounts for
nearly 10% of the sections in the charge of four senior officers. As against this, the recently
created department of Rain Shadow Area Development has only five sections under a Secretary,
with the assistance of a deputy secretary and an assistant secretary. Similar is the case with the
Public Enterprise Department which earlier was part of the General Administration Department
and was separated from it in the wake of the privatization process of public enterprises in the
State initiated as a part of structural adjustment. The latest addition to the number of

37
departments is the Infrastructure and Investment department entrusted with strategic planning
and oversight of mega infrastructure and investment projects. To start with this department has
only a Principal Secretary with a deputy secretary level officer and two assistant secretaries,
significantly, and hopefully without any conventional section attached to it. The issues that arise
out of this are problems of internal coordination within large departments; and viability and
transaction costs of the smaller ones; and issues arising out of overlap, duplication and lack of
coordination with allied departments of the sector, an example being coordination of policies in
the Welfare Sector which now comprises the departments of Social Welfare and Tribal Welfare,
Backward Classes Welfare, Minorities Welfare, Women Development, Child Welfare &
Disabled Welfare and Youth Welfare.

Failed Experiment in Sectoral Coordination

There was a well intentioned but unsuccessful move to have sectoral coordination within the
agriculture sector comprising the departments of Agriculture and Cooperation; Animal
Husbandry, and Dairy, Development and Fisheries; and Irrigation and Command Area
Development by having a coordinating functionary in the secretariat designated as the
Agricultural Production Commissioner and Ex-officio Principal Secretary to Government. This
noteworthy experiment has resulted so far of being a fifth wheel to a vehicle.

Ex-officio Secretaries of Line Departments

Composite departments combining line and staff ie the centre of Government and executive
agency is a special variant to be noted here resorted to in the case of predominantly executive
implementing departments without substantive policy concerns. An example is the Food, Civil
Supplies and Consumer Affairs department which is headed by an Ex-officio Secretary to
Government who is the head of the field executive department of Civil Supplies with his own
Director in the Commissionerate acting as an Ex-officio deputy or Joint Secretary, with the
skeletal secretariat assistance of an assistant secretary and four sections for tracking and record
keeping purposes based on single file system of moving the file from the Commissionerate to the
Government and back when orders of Government are required being sent back after appropriate
decisions and orders thereon. At one time the Ex-officio secretary and Commissioner Civil
Supplies also was the Chairman of the Civil Supplies Corporation undertaking procurement,
storage, distribution and transport of food and other essential supplies combining secretariat,
head of the department and corporate functions in him presenting a perfect example of three way
coordination of secretarial, staff and field departmental and corporate structures. Other examples
of this form of organization are the Ex-officio sub department of Vigilance and Enforcement
forming part of the General Administration Department in which the Director General Vigilance
and Enforcement and Ex-officio Principal Secretary reports through Chief Secretary to the Chief
Minister; and the sub department of Disaster Relief within the Revenue Department looked after
by the Commissioner Relief and Ex-officio Secretary in the Revenue department. The question
of comparative merits and demerits of this kind of organizational pattern vis--vis the regular
department is a matter for a detailed examination.

38
Number and Diversity of Field Agencies

The manifold expansion in the secretariat structure and the number of senior civil servants in
charge has been more than matched by the accelerating number and types of implementing
agencies connected with or reporting to the departments of secretariat. Initially field regulatory,
revenue raising or service providing agencies were predominantly offices of Heads of
Departments that too limited in number. Over time this number stood at around 142 in the year
1976. On the other hand today we have a range of field agencies numbering over 285
comprising constitutional bodies, courts, tribunals, Ombudsman, regulatory authorities, statutory
agencies, heads of departments, statutory corporations, companies registered under the
Companies Act, federated and unitary cooperative societies, societies registered under the
Societies Registration Act, commissions, non statutory boards, committees, project authorities,
universities, Government educational, research, training and other institutes, and other
instrumentalities of Government forming part of the State including grant-in-aid institutions
and NGOs receiving assistance from Government discharging constitutional, statutory,
administrative, arbitration, regulatory, municipal, infrastructural, developmental, welfare, service
delivery, research, training, production, marketing, etc functions. A minor but significant point
arising out of this having a bearing on the process of communicating Government decisions to
these bodies down to their lowest hierarchical units relates to the absence of a comprehensive list
of such agencies anywhere in Government. An implication of this has been that instead of a
general Government communication intended to be dispatched to the other two wings of the
State and to all secretariat departments and all agencies under each of them cannot and are not
being issued as such based on a comprehensive, standard dispatch list covering all of them with
the result that today the department issuing the order or communication requires each of the
secretariat departments to communicate copies of the order to agencies and institution with
which they are connected with instruction in turn to each of them to communicate the same to
the offices and establishments subordinate to them right down to the lowest field unit. The
official communication of such an order in this procedure could take several months to reach all
those to whom it is intended. It may not even find its way in time and to all and because of
lapses on the part of the departments or organizations to undertake this chain operation. The
alternative of gazetting such an order is also not without its problems, as publication in the
gazette is only legal presumptive compliance and does not necessarily mean actual
communication to all. These problems of accessibility and availability which cannot continue
for long in view of the mandatory right to information is capable of being effectively tackled
through the application of Information Communication Technologies. Internet enables all such
information to be put on net and Email enables instant communication to all automatically.

Duplication of Functions of Organizations

While different organizational structures have been evolved to suit the specific constitutional,
statutory, administrative or functional requirements, there are cases of a number of such
organizations of different types to do the same thing, being formed. A case in point relates to
housing. There has been a statutory housing board incorporated under a statute entrusted with a
function of developing housing colonies. In addition today we have housing companies
incorporated under the Companies Act like the Andhra Pradesh State Housing Corporation and

39
the Police Housing Corporation, Housing Federation incorporated under the Cooperative
Societies Act. The need for having different forms of organization for the same purpose and also
for meeting the requirement of specific sections can be called in question. An allied factor which
was ignored when corporate agencies were formed to secure flexibility of operations by being
relieved of stifling controls on a regular department agency, except where a part of the
department or specific tasks were separated and incorporated as a company along with personnel
of the department then in charge of them, related to the clear demarcation of the functions of the
two agencies establishing requisite linkages between the field department and the new entity and
the possibility of cutting back the department structure and functions correspondingly.

Mismatch of Structure and Civil Service Positions

The expansion has not merely been in the number of departments of secretariat and the territorial
spread of the departmental agencies. It has also been evident in the internal growth of the size of
each of these departments and the number, levels and status of officers occupying the layers of
the internal hierarchy. This has led to substantial increase in their number and cost to
Government. For the basic level of a secretary to Government we have now three categories of
officers occupying this level. Similarly, for the level of deputy secretary we have three
categories of officers i.e., deputy secretaries, joint secretaries and additional secretaries. This has
no functional justification, the only compulsion being cadre management and the need to provide
salary hikes to officers necessitating promotions to higher and higher grades and varying
designations without any additional powers or responsibilities discharging the same functions
and distorting lines of communications and control. This has succeeded in providing only higher
status and rank without corresponding power or wider areas of responsibility in keeping with
seniority, age and experience. Today one therefore sees incongruity of structural levels and
corresponding civil service positions. A deputy secretary speaking to his counterpart deputy
secretary in another department could be quite different from a deputy secretary speaking to his
counterpart holding the rank of an additional secretary. The escalating tendency to have officers
of higher levels has paradoxically been accompanied by kicking up the level of consideration of
issues in the secretariat. The power of the deputy secretary to circulate a case to the Minister in
charge was withdrawn requiring circulation of every file of consequence to the secretary in
charge of the subject. A point, minor though which illustrates this is the example of postings and
transfers of All India Service Officers which used to be directly handled by the Chief Secretary
to Government with the assistance of the section officer concerned today passes through the
Assistant Secretary, Deputy Secretary and Secretary to the Chief Secretary and back in the same
manner. Confidentiality and speed are the resultant casualties providing time and opportunity to
manipulative officers to try their luck.

A major focus of the initiatives has been a systematic move to bring power closer to the field
through decentralization, delegation and devolution of powers and de-concentration of decision
making authority to the field agencies of Government and to local self-Government institutions.
Our federal structure, with its strong unitary character notwithstanding, now envisages
devolution of powers to the third tier of Government in respect of a wide variety of subjects, as a
result of the 73rd and 74th amendments to the Constitution of India, to which a reference has been
made earlier. However, in Andhra Pradesh this is yet to take place in a manner true to the spirit
of constitutional amendments which envisage devolution of powers, functions and finances with

40
freedom to have personnel answerable and belonging to the local self-governing institutions. A
serious attempt in this sphere to facilitate need based peoples plan formulation and
implementation from below at the district level with functions and finances devolving on them as
envisaged is yet to materialize. The apex Government machinery will remain overloaded with
these functions till such time such devolution does not take place. Micro management of such
functions which legitimately belong to the grassroots self governing institutions and district
administration amounts to encroachments in their rightful jurisdiction. Doubtless such
incursions produce debilitating effects on field capacity.

The growth of the structure and size of the machinery of Government can be gauged by the fact
that Andhra Pradesh had, according to the last quinquinnial census of public servants with
reference date as 1.1.2002, 12.28 lakh public servants comprising Government servants, local
body employees, and employees of the public enterprises. The State budget of Rs 50 crores in
the year 1956-57 has correspondingly grown to meet the multifarious requirements to around
Rs 50,000 crores in 2004-05. This continuous expansion of the role of Government, from a mere
regulatory state to an all round development and welfare state in keeping with the growing
aspirations of the citizens, is having severe impact on the budget, testing the policy and
implementation capacity of the Government, increasing problems of coordination,
communication, feedback, monitoring and evaluation leading to enormous cost, increased
complexity of internal processes, inordinate delays and reducing time available for prompt
consideration of substantial issues of policy.

Political Executive

Structure of Government comprises the political Executive and the administrative hierarchy in
the secretariat and in the field. Size of the political Executive in command of executive
Government represented by the size of the ministry used to be a problem in the past till a
statutory limit was put on the number in order to do away with the power to have Jumbo
Cabinet to accommodate desperate political combinations and or numerous claimants
representing different interests or simply to secure the political might to form the Government.
The State luckily today has a very compact ministry comprising 25 members including the Chief
Minister which is less than the total number of departments and considerably less than half the
number of secretaries to Government. A compact size incidentally obviates the need for
deciding the question of whether a minister should be a Cabinet Minister, having right to attend
meetings of the Council of Ministers or a minister of state or a deputy minister in attendance
upon invitation only or in the event of an item of agenda in his name is to be discussed.

A minister is in charge of policy and oversight of implementation in respect of subjects assigned

to him apart from being responsible for collective decision making in the Cabinet. The
fundamental purpose of having a secretariat distinct from the executing agencies is to ensure
broad separation of policy from implementation which is specifically entrusted to the field
implementing agencies. There is a strong tendency quite contrary to this fundamental principle
on the part of ministers and the secretariat to concentrate power in their hands and to micro
manage implementation from the secretariat departments with the result that the secretariat has
come to be identified as the real power centre even in matters of execution because of such
intrusion into the legitimate domain of the executive agencies. While there is delegation of

41
responsibility in matters of execution to the heads of departments and other field agencies there
is no corresponding delegation of power and authority to the heads of departments and in their
turn to the lower formations in the hierarchy in order to enable them to achieve their objectives
and accomplish the task of regulation, service delivery or programme or project implementation
entrusted to them. The very origin of the secretariat is anchored in the belief that the task of
policy making must needs to be separated from that of its execution. As rightly pointed out by
the report of Administrative Enquiry Committee, Bombay as far back in 1948 the existence of
the secretariat in the Government organization arises from the need for separating questions of
policy from current administration so that the latter is entirely handed over to a separate agency
which enjoys certain amount of freedom in the field of execution. This tendency is contrary to
the well recognized principles that the secretariat shall only be in charge of oversight of
implementation ensuring accountability of the field agency, not engage itself in areas where it is
unable to contribute anything positive; and that the head of the department shall have functional
autonomy in order that he may have the powers of supervision, control and direction of the
machinery and personnel manning the department in order to be held accountable for the
functions in his charge.

Policy Vs Implementation Precept and Practice

This tendency for over concentration of powers at the top is also visible in the allocation of
functions between the minister and the civil servants assisting him in the secretariat. Contrary to
provisions of Rule 22 of the Andhra Pradesh Government Business Rules stipulates standing
orders to ensure de-concentration of authority of the minister in charge to the official levels in
the department. Real experience has been that hardly any such order is issued by successive
ministers in the secretariat defeating the very purpose of the provisions of the rules of business
envisaging distributed decision making in the department. Thus ministers are today more
preoccupied with day to day routine administrative decisions having a bearing on
implementation instead of strategic and operational sectoral policies and oversight of their
implementation in relation to the subjects assigned to him. They are also preoccupied with the
urgent rather than what are important.

The legitimate functions of the secretariat are policy formulation and operationalization of policy
through laws, regulations, plans and programmes; coordination between secretariat departments
and the secretariat and the field, and other wings of Government and external agencies including
the private sector and civil society; financial and administrative oversight of implementation; and
interest arbitration by way of exercise of powers of review, revision and relaxation. But a
substantial part of the actual work done in the secretariat involves handling of grievances,
complaints, individual cases, routine administrative work of postings, promotions, transfers,
punishments and other conditions of service of lower subordinates which ought to be done at the
field level, routine financial sanctions and unending litigation involving Government and the
citizen and Government and its own servants arising at times out of insufficient consideration of
issues, indiscretion, illegality, serious violations of procedure, and failure to take timely action
resulting in complications arising out of infringement of legitimate rights etc. Failure of the
field administrative machinery to effectively handle grievances in time leads to petitioning to
Government. While the political executive cannot be blamed for rightly entertaining such
petitions seeking redress of grievance, sanction of benefit or justice at the hands of Government.

42
A grievance cell at the secretariat or at the level of ministers cannot be a shortcut solution to the
basic problems of unresponsiveness, antipathy, delay and corruption on the part of field
functionaries for which solutions have to be found elsewhere. Another contributory factor to
clogging of the machinery is the tendency to entertain revision petitions or even memorials over
and over again even in respect of matters which have been considered and rejected earlier instead
of refusing to entertain them again. Similarly entertaining and approving applications involving
requests not permissible in accordance with the prevailing rules, criteria or practice, in relaxation
is yet another major factor. Orders of Government involving such requests, at times specifically
mentioning that it shall not be quoted as precedents become precisely the ground for extension
of the same facility over and over again. They also lead to litigation and a chain reaction and
legally binding obligation on Government by virtue of pronouncements of courts. They have
also other adverse effects on administration like lobbying, manipulation and corruption.
Secretariat can also be held guilty of causing or contributing to a lot of unnecessary litigation
with the citizens and with its own employees even at times without regard to whether legal costs
would not in excess of the monetary value of the original requests in the process of taking
litigation in appeal, revision and application for special leave to the Supreme Court. The Andhra
Pradesh Administrative Tribunal which was established in order to curtail recourse to the High
Courts by public servants in writ in regard to involving service disputes with Government has
now become a major problem contributing to manifold increase in litigation by virtue of the less
costly access to the Tribunal in which Government becomes a necessary party. This together
with the fact that the Tribunal added an extra tier to service litigation as it could not take away
the writ jurisdiction in service matters could be the reasons why two States have already decided
the Tribunal in their respective states abolished reverting jurisdiction to the High Court. In the
wake of localization of cadres, under the Six Point Formula, in accordance with the Presidential
Order under Article 371-D of the Constitution orders were issued delegating powers of the
appointing authority upto the second gazetted level as far as possible to the heads of departments
and further down to the field functionaries appropriately to ensure effective management and
control of the cadre and to improve the effectiveness of the head of the department at the head
quarters and in the field. This order, though kept in abeyance for long and now reissued, is yet to
be implemented in its true spirit. Still the secretariat continues to meddle with cadre
management of lower functionaries involving their postings, promotions, transfers, punishments
etc formally or informally not only adding to the unnecessary work of the secretariat but also
badly undermining the authority of the head of the department and senior officers in the field
who helplessly watch their subordinates manipulating the livers of power over their heads. This
also contributes to corruption as in the case of relaxation of rules and entertainment of second
appeals, revisions and reviews.

Layers of Futile Processing

One comes across in the secretariat departments the paradox of concentration of power and
authority to advise ministers at the hands of the senior civil servants coupled with tendency on
the part of these officers wielding power to excessively rely on the subordinate staff to do the
initial examination of the issues involved and to make recommendations thereon even though
they are not expected to and do not have the requisite knowledge or expertise to do so. This
excessive reliance is contributing to undue delays, at times intentional in the submission of
papers, superficial analysis and corruption. Even proposals of heads of departments etc

43
involving serious issues of policy and technical content are ordinarily examined in the section in
the secretariat, by officers who neither have the qualification, knowledge, competence or
authority to initiate action thereon except to put up the relevant papers promptly for
consideration at the appropriate level, contrary to the equivalency principle requiring an officer
of a corresponding rank to examine a proposal received by him. This is a complaint of often one
hears from heads of departments and even constitutional bodies like the High Court and the
Public Service Commission. Needless to say that it is patently incorrect to initiate the
examination of a proposal received from the High Court or similar institution which would
obviously have had the clearance of the highest authority competent to approve such proposal by
a secretariat assistant or even a section officer and comment upon the merits and demerits
thereon.

There are instructions in regard to single file system from the offices of heads of departments to
the secretariat which are disregarded. Even though the secretariat instructions cast an obligation
on a secretary to Government to provide a senior head of the department an opportunity of being
heard in defence of his proposal if it is proposed for any reason to rejected it this is hardly
observed in utter disregard of his right and status as the head of the department making the
proposal. As a matter of fact except in purely routine or repetitive matters an assistant section
officer is not expected to deal with any paper. But routinely all proposals in the secretariat are
initiated at that level most of the time; even in respect of subjects which have been assigned to
desk officers under the desk officer system intended to reduce the number of levels of
consideration of a file in the secretariat, at times informally if not totally in disregard of the
same. Similar is the fate of level jumping intended to achieve the same purpose of reducing the
number of levels of consideration.

The Business Rules had originally defined secretary to Government to mean and include a
special chief secretary, principal secretary, secretary, additional secretary, joint secretary and
deputy secretary; and had designated a deputy secretary as a circulating officer stipulating that
all files circulated directly shall on return be first seen by the secretary concerned achieving the
purposes of reducing levels of consideration, actively involving a deputy secretary in the
decision making process and at the same time enabling secretary to keep himself informed. With
the proliferation of number of senior officers being posted to the secretariat, this provision was
omitted. However it has now been rightly revive, though it is a different matter whether all
deputy secretaries in the secretariat are effectively making use of these provisions and whether
all of them have the knowledge, competence, experience, expertise and analytical ability
expected in matters of higher levels strategic policy relating to subjects which are quite often
technical in nature.

Preoccupation with Routine

The basic problem is that the secretariat continues to be an organization which is clerk centered,
rule bound, legalistic and procedure oriented, precedent ridden, with too many levels in the
hierarchy without requisite technical knowledge and subject expertise, and as a consequence ill
equipped and unequal to the task of high level strategic and operational policy making and
coordination. This apart secretariat is characterized by extremely poor work culture and blatant
disregard of the rules and procedure stipulated in the secretariat manual for file management with

44
hardly any supervision and control or periodic inspection. Maintenance and check of personal
registers of currents, detention lists and arrears lists of files, stock files which provide the much
needed memory, reference manuals and books, receipt and review of periodical returns in respect
of subjects dealt in the section have become rare events in the secretariat making the dealing
assistants masters of all that they survey and pivot around which things turn.

Sections today have lost institutional memory. Even where an earnest assistant section officer or
section officer wishes to refer to the law, rules or manuals, stock files of precedent cases relevant
to a matter under examination it often so happens that they are simply not available in the
department making it extremely difficult to secure copies of the same. Instances are not wanting
when help of heads of departments and Collectors or sought for securing copies or even orders of
Government said to have been misplaced. For want of copies of acts and rules which are of
even day to day use published by Government and circulated to all concerned private law
publishers have had to step in to fill this vacuum not only for the general public but for the
Government itself. Such publishers have taken over the function of a legal remembrancer of
Government. Even while copies of acts and rules in force required for constant use of
Government are not available, a large number of outdated dead legislations and rules continue to
be in the statute books of Government for want of sunset clause in the relevant acts or
introduction of repeal acts to weed them out. No conscious one time attempt even has been
made in the foreseeable past in this regard. The problem in respect of compilation and
publication of rules under the various enactments is even worse. This in turn has increased the
reliance on the lowest level having knowledge of the matter multiplying the tendency to rely on
the lowest level and on a single person at times who gets identified as indispensable. It would be
no exaggeration to say that as a result the secretariat has become an ill equipped, over staffed and
under worked organization constantly complaining of excess workload and expanding
continuously from within.

Designed not to Deliver

The functional structure of the secretariat has been fragmented over the years where procedural
delays have become routine. It looks as though it is designed not to deliver. Individual
departments hands are severely tied and their initiative and enterprise badly mauled by
excessive concentration of financial, legal and personnel functions in the coordinating
departments of secretariat viz., the Finance and Planning departments, Law and Legislative
Affairs, and the General Administration Department. An off shoot of this linkage has been the
tendency to rely excessively on these departments even in routine matters as a safeguard or as a
means of avoidance of responsibility. The time table for formulation and passing of budget as is
being presently done is also not conducive to timely release of funds and effective
implementation of programmes right from the beginning right through to the end of the year.
The budget is usually passed by the end of March; where it has not been possible a vote on
account for a short period is taken before the year ends and final budget is passed long after the
financial year commences. Further there is no practice of pre budget scrutiny before inclusion of
a scheme in the budget as a result of which this takes place long after the new year commences.
Departments are obliged to approach the Finance department not only for scrutiny and approval
of new schemes, after the passing of the budget but also for sanction of the schemes, budget
authorization and release of funds. Files are sent to the finance department again for routine

45
vetting of the draft order sanctioning the scheme or releasing funds. In the course of the year if
they find that there is operational requirement for inter-transfer of funds between schemes etc the
departments have no power of reappropriation except for minor modifications authorized by
standing instructions of the department of finance for which they have to seek the approval of the
finance department. These factors are cumulatively responsible for the well known March rush
with all its attendant evils telling upon implementation including incorrect and at times
unauthorized transfer of unspent funds to corporate or personal accounts in respect of which the
Government looses track leading to its own problems. Another major factor to be reckoned with
in regard to the budgetary processes in the State relates to preparation of unrealistic budget with
large deficits and the sanction of new schemes involving substantial financial commitments for
which there is no budget provision and which are to be treated as new service items creating a
situation of excessive liquidity crunch forcing the hands of the finance department to introduce
cuts in budgeted items of expenditure as the year progresses at times together with measures of
stoppage of bills in the Treasury or Pay and Accounts office. Excess estimation of revenue and
shortfall in actual realizations in the course of the year also contribute to such formal and
informal cuts to these are added formal economy measures by way of across the board cut in the
budget introduced depending on the exigencies of circumstances. All these increase avoidable
constraints in the way of implementation, curtail its effectiveness, contribute to duplication of
efforts, extra file movements, delayed implementation and unauthorized diversion of funds and
reduction of accountability. In so far as it concerns plan financing and plan schemes similar
consultation with the planning department would also be necessitated. Such references to two
departments for the same purpose have been necessitated because of the absence of an integrated
finance and planning department where expenditure control in respect of plan schemes both from
the planning and finance angles are examined and cleared by a single officer. The complication
in respect of plan schemes does not end here if the scheme involves creation of new posts for
which consultation become necessary with the general administration services department adding
yet another tier to the process of consultation.

Similar is the case in regard to all legal matters where the department is obliged to consult the
law department, the knowledge, skills and legal competence of which is subject to serious
question today. Orders of Government should be able to withstand legal scrutiny. For this they
have to be in correct language and legally sustainable. Unfortunately the poor linguistic
proficiency of the secretariat employees coupled with inadequate drafting skill and insufficient
legal acumen in the law department is resulting in any number of even simple orders issued by
Government being poorly drafted not to talk of the their ability to withstand legal scrutiny. One
is reminded of the celebrated advise of a venerable Chief Minister soon after the country became
a Republic when he emphasized that now that we are a Republic our laws and rules have not
only to be fool-proof but they have at the same time to be judge proof. The pity is even drafts
vetted by law are at times defective.

Departments are similarly required to consult the General Administration Services Department
in respect of specified matters concerning personnel and in addition the finance department if
such proposals have even routine financial implications. This is so in spite of the successive
formal delegations of financial and administrative powers issued by the respective departments.
This process not only delays matters considerably but also is being intentionally misused by
certain members of the staff by unnecessary references to these departments even in respect of

46
matters within their competence simply to avoid responsibility for the action which they are
obliged to take or to cause intentional delay or hurdles in the process of approval of the proposal
(to enhance bargaining power).

Problems of Coordination

In order to facilitate expeditious disposal of departmental business involving consultation with

sister departments dealing with allied sectors and with the coordinating departments the
secretariat instructions stipulate personal discussion between the departments concerned in order
to sort out outstanding issues and to facilitate quick disposal of such matter. Such meetings are
held for intra departmental consultations with the field agencies also. In many departments such
meetings take place on an adhoc basis whenever the need arises in any specific matter with result
that often one finds that secretaries to Government are mostly attending or conducting meetings
pointing to the need for well considered standing arrangements for dealing with classes of issues
at regular intervals within each department, with its field agencies, with allied sectoral
departments and with coordinating departments. In view of the proliferation of the number of
secretaries in the same department coordination between them itself is in need of streamlining.
For larger issues involving the whole of secretariat more particularly service matters it has been
the practice to hold monthly meetings of secretaries to Government convened by the General
Administration Department and chaired by the Chief Secretary. There used to be a standing
services sub committee in the past. One wonders how such meetings are being held now a days
with over 63 secretaries to Government and the extent to which they serve the purpose.

The business rules and secretariat instructions require circulation of certain matters which are
specified in the business rules to the Chief Secretary, the Chief Minister and the Governor. The
classes of cases which are so required to be submitted are in need of careful scrutiny and pruning
so as to reduce the workload of the Chief Secretary and the Chief Minister to enable them to
concentrate on matters of emergent character which cannot wait and inherently important matters
consideration of which get delayed or diluted in view of excessive preoccupation with the routine
current issues to the detriment of larger issues of policy and of future consequence to the State.

Silo Mentality of Departments

Administrative machinery of Government as organized in a vertical hierarchical fashion

sectorally or sub-sectorally encourages a silo mentality with tendency to concentrate in its own
path without concern for whole of Government or common collective interest, often
championing their causes disregarding the adverse impact on other sectoral departments to the
detriment of public interest. It is often said of Government that one hand doesnt know what the
other is doing. As constituted today with substantial separation of legal, financial and personnel
functions, the officers of the secretariat departments examine proposals in isolation with
disregard for financial prudence, legal conformity and human resource aspects as if these are
totally the responsibilities of the coordinating departments. The proposal therefore remains
essentially a department proposal whereas it ought to be treated with due concern for and prima
facie consideration of financial, managerial and legal implications and acceptability and other
sectoral interests before seeking concurrence of coordinating departments. Deprivation of
requisite powers has led to a situation of abdication of responsibility for the total proposal

47
leaving it to the coordinating departments to handle the financial, personnel, legal angles in
isolation. This highlights the fact that the historical growth and structural complexities of the
machinery of Government, as it has evolved, has aggravated the fundamental problem of
coordination and cohesiveness of decision making in Government. To borrow the words of
Pressman and Wildavsky no phrase expresses as frequent a complaint about the (federal)
bureaucracy as does the lack of coordination. No suggestion for reform is more common than
what we need is more coordination.

Transaction costs involved in coordinating a number of small policy interests could be

considerable, while it could be argued that small ministries are conducive to greater autonomy
with liberty to set its own policy and programme agenda within the overall constraints. But they
could suffer from lack of economies of scale, meagre budgetary allocations at its command,
greater establishment costs which would have otherwise been avoidable. To be specific very
small departments also require to allocate staff for house keeping functions like office procedure,
payments, purchases, and the like establishment functions apart from personnel functions,
budgeting and planning, and other functions like legislative coordination. Creation of a small
new ministry may be a political ploy just to appease a vociferous section of the populous without
real intentions of tackling substantive issues and allocating requisite resources. On the other
hand, given real commitment to a particular cause, a new ministry could be a way of forcing
future Governments into accepting continuance of support for such cause and demonstrating real
commitment on the part of Government to further the particular cause which is symbolized by
the new department or ministry. The main challenge here will however be how to coordinate
the disparate parts of Government into a coherent whole.

The real purpose of the secretariat is to ensure the management of coordination of the decision
making and performance monitoring of Government as a whole. It should not replace its
subordinate units or divisions and should not carry out their work for them. It is their duty to
ensure that each part of the machinery performs its assigned functions and that together they
achieve their collective objectives without indulging in micro management as is now rampant.
Both the political executives and the civil servants are to be held accountable for this. In short
excessive formal and informal concentration of functions and powers and micro management of
functions, finances and functionaries from the top are major reason for clogging of the policy
formulation and decision making system in the secretariat. To an extent this tendency has
extended to the heads of departments and chief executives of organizations also further crippling
their capacity. Politicization of bureaucracy not only at the top but right down to the field level
is another major factor adversely affecting the quality of governance and implementation
capacity of Government.

Inadequacy of Policy Capacity

Policy development, coordination, monitoring and evaluation of implementation are the primary
roles of Government secretariat, the prevailing conception concerning these being purely reactive
and administrative in the sense of executing the agenda of the party in power or merely
implementing the sectoral policy decisions of the minister. One is faced not merely with
incorrect understanding of the role of political executives with the tendency to do things and
administer rather than lay down policy and steer the course of events. Formulation and

48
coordination of policy which is the primary function of Government suffers today from too much
of adhocism in the political process of policy making. Similarly the role of the permanent civil
service at the secretariat assisting the political executive in this most crucial task is rather
reactive instead of being proactive. Institutional capacity for long range strategic policy is
almost absent today. There is also in addition very little policy research within Government.
Further association of the stakeholders, civil society bodies, academics and research institutions
in this task is hardly resorted to and leaves much ground to be covered.

As rightly concluded by Michael Ben Gera the link between policy and communications has
been growing stronger along with the link between politics and media. As a result the process
of policy commitment and Government communications is becoming interwoven, some of the
reasons for which are the increasing emphasis on transparency which casts an obligation on
Government to explain what they are going and why and confers a basic right on the citizen;
the need to explain the rationale behind Government decisions to enhance its acceptability; to
counter the tendency on the part of the press to play up the negative side of the policy requiring
Government to present the full picture and to explain the correct intensions and finally to ensure
coordinated exposition of the collective views of the political executive rather than the airing of
partial stories by individual ministries. Similarly the implementation of Government decisions
and monitoring results are quintessential responsibilities of the Government departments,
monitoring of such performance often becoming mechanical focusing on formal aspects relating
to costs, targets and time limits rather than the outcome and impacts of the measures monitored.
There is need to broaden the concepts of implementation and monitoring to concrete
implementation of policies, programmes and legislation.

Outmoded Base and Unsuitable Personnel

The components of structure of an organization and its systems, processes and procedures are all
intimately linked to recruiting and retaining motivated staff with required qualifications,
knowledge and skills. Therefore, structural issues cannot be examined in isolation from public
services. To start with the composition of a secretariat section is itself in need of drastic
modification in the light of developments in technology, increasing sophistication of subjects and
the need for flattening the structure to bring down the hierarchical levels and reduce the time
taken for decision making. A typical section comprises a section officer, two assistant section
officers and a typist cum assistant. In addition there are last grade categories of attenders and
roneo operators apart from drivers and other supporting staff in the department. Technological
developments have rendered the posts of typist, roneo operators etc totally redundant. Unlike in
private business, attenders are routinely employed in the secretariat in every section and with
every officer. Even the category of stenographers would progressively become a dying category
as officers acquire knowledge of and proficiency in the operation of computers.

The underlying practices governing recruitment, pre-entry and in service training, departmental
tests in respect of appointments to the categories to the posts of assistant section officers and
TCAs not only in the single unit but also in the special units of appointment of finance, law and
legislature and their promotion are in need of urgent reform. Today recruitment in secretariat is
confined to the initial categories of TCA and assistant section officer who become eligible all the
way exclusively by promotion right up to the category of additional secretary by practice and

49
contrary to rules purely on the basis of seniority. The qualification for entry is a degree in any
subject irrespective of the department in the single unit. Unlike in the central secretariat there is
no direct recruitment in the category of section officers or to any other category. The secretariat
structure and rules do not envisage any subject expert in any department to assist the department
in handling even sophisticated technically complex issues, all the technical expertise being
required to be provided by the respective heads of departments (whose proposals are as already
mentioned, examined at the clerical level invariably). There are a couple of exceptions in
practice like having a town planning expert in the HMA & UD department, a chief engineer as
technical adviser in the irrigation department, etc which only prove the rule and emphasize the
need in this regard. In the legislature department an initial entrant can go right up to the post of
secretary, all posts of deputy secretaries in the legislature secretariat being by promotion only
except when a lateral entry is made at the level of secretary which is very rare? Similar is the
case with the law department, a raw graduate entering the department and acquiring a law degree
even part time can hope to go to the top except the law secretary who is ordinarily a district
judge on deputation to the secretariat. There is no lateral entry at any other level. In the finance
department things are a little better in that at least cadre officers enter the category of deputy
secretary and above.

Mismanagement of Personnel Issues

While recruitment at the rock bottom level alone is bad enough the way in which recruitment is
done in the secretariat makes matters much worse. Partly contributed by historical and political
factors and partly due to recurring financial stringency, ban on regular direct recruitment has
become a bane of personnel management in Andhra Pradesh, not only in secretariat but also
elsewhere in all other services. Paradoxically while regular recruitment through the Public
Service Commission is banned irregular recruitments take place by way of purely temporary
recruitments easily compromising merit, competition and openness which turn out to be for all
intents and purposes permanent recruitment and of late by way of engaging casual labour or
making contract appointments at times through the back door which by the very nature of
Government get regularized in course of time giving a go by to age, qualification, competence
and equal opportunity which would otherwise be expected by recruitment through Public Service
Commission. These typists and junior assistants get promoted as assistant section officers and
section officers to go right up to almost assistant secretary. When recruitment takes place after
years there is bunching of recruitment with a large number of persons entering in the same
category at the same time. This also gives rise to legal issues of non observance of ratio of direct
recruitment and promotion and inter-se seniority between direct recruitments and promotees with
its attendant problems of lack of authentic seniority lists leading to adhoc promotions in the
higher categories including the compulsion of having to make in charge arrangements in the
promoted categories as a consequence of court litigations and resultant stay orders with large
number of unfilled posts.

The merit principle in the matter of promotion is virtually a thing of past in todays
circumstances. Promotions seem to take place simply as a fulfillment of the subordinates right to
promotion (rather than right to being considered for promotion) and does not seem to reckon the
genuine needs of Government for officers to fill vacancies in large numbers at times kept as such

50
due to stay orders of courts so as to attend to the duties enjoined on the posts and serve the
citizens for whose benefit the governing exists.

Defective Personnel Policy

Paradoxically where there ought to be 29 cadre officers of the Indian Administrative Service as
against 49 non cadre officers in the circulating officer categories of additional secretary, joint
secretary and deputy secretary, there are at present hardly a dozen IAS officers many of whom
are State Civil Service Officers promoted to the cadre, the remaining slots being filled by Indian
Forest Service Officers and officers of the central services belonging to Revenue, Railways,
Defence Accounts and the like whose expertise and experience are not required in the secretariat
and who cannot be expected to have the knowledge, field experience or qualification required for
the job of a circulating officer in the secretariat. The very purpose of earmarking specific
number of posts in the secretariat at the level of deputy, joint and additional secretary is to bring
to bear understanding of issues, felt needs, problems, etc in the field, knowledge of subjects and
experience in the field in the actual implementation of programmes to facilitate pragmatic policy
and programme formulation apart from making use of their analytical abilities in examining
issues. Some of the secretariat officers occupying these positions have got into this pool from
the category of stenographers by virtue of their seniority and years of tenure as a section officer
and therefore cannot be expected to have as much knowledge and expertise in regard to
secretariat procedure and the relevant subjects which the regular section offices would otherwise
have by virtue of their long standing experience acquired over years of service in the relevant
department. Even the secretariat officers drawn from the category of section officers are
however presently devoid of field experience which is an asset when formulating realistic
policies suitable for prevailing circumstances.

Rampant Corruption

Corruption was virtually unknown in the secretariat decades ago. But today it has become so
widespread and has been rising from layer to layer almost right to the top with the general
impression gaining ground that without money or influence no paper will move inside the
secretariat. Things have reached a point where a copy of an order obtained after use of money
and influence at every level will not reach the destination unless even the despatch is taken care
of. The excessive delay in the initiation and processing of files, the accumulation of files over
years, layers of processing involved, the number of departments needing consultation, the
excessive initiative resting with the sections in regard to processing of files, unwillingness of
officers to take responsibility for decisions, and above all loss of fear of law in view of the
widespread belief that the anti corruption and vigilance agencies keep away from the secretariat
are all factors which have been contributing to this sorry state of affairs.

Working Environment and Response to Public

Improving the work environment and physical infrastructure in the secretariat in a manner
conducive to increase productivity and quality of output of the personnel serving the centre of
Government should also be treated as an integral part of modernization and restructuring of the
secretariat. A beginning has already been made in this direction to substantially alter the quality

51
of the working environment on the lines of modern corporate offices. Efforts are on presently
not merely to provide adequate accommodation and improved office lay out with proper lighting,
seating and other creature comforts but also to mechanize office processes and facilitate
networking and modern communication tools with extensive recourse to information
communication technologies. A new visitor to the secretariat is all at sea not knowing where to
go and whom to approach in order to transact the business which brings him to the secretariat
premises. There is no satisfactory facility to guide him, except the reception counter to issue
pass during the limited hours to permit entry. Neither is there a call centre with a common
number attached to the secretariat except access to the secretariat telephone exchange which
most of the time remains unattended or unhelpful to a person calling the secretariat. The plight
of a visitor to the secretariat can be imagined in the absence of such basic facility of access not to
talk of information and assistance to get his things done.

52
 Chapter 3

Earlier Committee Reports and Studies

Over the last several decades a number of committees have gone into the machinery of
Government and the Secretariat at the State and the Centre. There have also been a number of
independent studies on the subject. An illustrative list of reports relevant to the present study at
the Centre and in the State is given below.

A) Centre

1) Report of Civil Establishment and Salaries (1866)

2) Report of the Government of India Secretariat Procedure Committee (1919)
3) Report of the Government of India Secretariat Committee (1937)
4) Report of the Committee on Reorganization and Procedure (1937)
5) Report of the Committee on Reorganization of Central Government (1945-46)
6) Report of the Secretariat Reorganization Committee (1947)
7) Report of the Reorganization of the Machinery of Government (1949)
8) Report on Public Administration (1951)
9) Report of Survey : Public Administration in India (1953), Paul H Appleby
10)Administration Reforms Commission Report - Machinery of Government and its Procedure
At Work, Machinery for Planning, State Administration (1960s)

B) Andhra Pradesh

1. Report of the Economy Committee 1950, A D Gorwala, Hyderabad

2. Report of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Reforms Commission 1960, K M Unnithan
Committee
3. Working of the Secretariat and Heads of Departments 1964 Study by M R Pai and G R
Reddy
4. Report of the Administrative Reforms Commission 1964, Ramchandra Reddy Committee
5. Report of the Committee on Measures for Toning up Administration 1975, K B Lal
Committee
6. Secretariat and Heads of Departments in Andhra Pradesh A Study, 1983, Prof G Ram
Reddy and Dr G Haragopal (Commissioned by State ARC 1982-83)
7. Report of M K Rustomji and Associates on Administrative Reforms, 1986
8. Committee to Review Administrative Reforms, 1990, S R Ramamurthy

C) Others

9. Assam Administrative Reforms Commission 2005

10. Maharashtra Administrative Reforms Commission
11. Economic Growth and Poverty Alleviation in Tamil Nadu A World Bank Study

An overview of major recommendations of the committees appointed by the Government and

studies which have gone into the aspects being examined in these report is helpful to take stock

53
of the extent to which these recommendations have been taken into account and accepted for
implementation and to assess their impact. Important recommendations relevant to this study
are recapitulated in the following paragraphs:

A D Gorwala Committee, 1950

The committee appointed by the erstwhile Hyderabad Government headed by A D Gorwala

(1950) which dealt with the problems of the secretariat and heads of departments found
excessive concentration of power in the hands of secretaries to Government. Side by side with
concentration of power in the hands of secretaries, it also found a tendency to avoid
responsibility within the secretariat where it found that the lower officers shudder at the idea of
deciding and suggested a good deal of decentralization of powers and functions of the
secretariat

Unnithan Committee, 1960.

This committee found that the distribution of subjects between the departments of secretariat was
irrational, that the heads of departments and secretariat operated in watertight compartments and
that the examination of proposals of the head of department seeking orders of Government
commenced mostly at the clerical level which was in no way qualified to scrutinize critically
these proposals. In order to remedy this situation the committee recommended the drastic step of
merger of heads of departments with secretariat according to a phased programme in three
stages, liberal delegation of powers to the administrative department to reappropriate funds
within major heads of expenditure as long as the overall provision in the budget was not
exceeded, in addition to institution of financial advisers set up in secretariat departments was
suggested to facilitate more quick and coherent decision making.

M R Pai and G Ram Reddy Study, 1964

This study found considerable delay being caused by the secretariat and the heads of departments
in the process of raising and answering unwarranted questions, was exacerbated by excessive
delay, cost and control exercised by the finance department, and found too much reliance on the
lower levels in the secretariat for examination of issues etc. To improve the situation it made
significant recommendations like induction of technical officers in the secretariat, divesting the
secretariat of routine work and administrative details leaving it to concentrate on policy and
drastically bringing down the secretariat levels to three viz., secretary, deputy and assistant
secretary with stenographic assistance provided to officers. Simultaneously it advised further
delegation of powers to the heads of departments and making them fully accountable for the
functions thereafter. The financial recommendations included institution of the financial adviser
system in each secretariat department with rigorous pre-budget scrutiny of budgets with full
freedom to the departments to operate within the budget.

Ramachandra Reddy Committee, 1964

This committee under the chairmanship of the then Minister Revenue found over 40% of the
time of the secretariat being spent on routine matters. While its main mandate was policy

54
formulation, the secretariat departments were found to be ignorant of field situations. In view of
this the committee found the need for a centralized agency in charge of the overall direction,
policy, implementation and evaluation of activities of each department by having the head of
each important department nominated as Ex-officio secretary to Government. Another
significant suggestion of the committee was that each department of secretariat may consist of
two distinct wings viz., the administrative wing and the Executive wing functioning under the
overall supervision of the secretary with the administrative wing consisting of a secretariat,
finance, vigilance and public relations cells leaving Executive wing in the charge of Ex-officio
secretary cum head of the filed department. Significant financial delegation was also
recommended to the administrative department and in turn down the line to the field.

K B Lal Committee, 1975

The Government appointed in 1975 upon localization of cadres under the Presidential Order in
pursuance of the Six Point Formula, the K B Lal Committee with M R Pai, B P R Vithal, V
Sundareshan and N K Seth as members to make recommendations to improve administration
which examined delegation of administrative powers, speeding up secretariat business and
improvement in the quality of work. On the issue of administrative delegations, the committee
recommended following the scheme of the Presidential Order for localization of cadres,
decentralization of powers in respect of non-gazetted and specified gazetted categories to the
heads of departments and corresponding lower levels in tune with organization of zonal and
district cadres, and in addition, delegation of powers of the appointing authority to the
numerically large second gazetted posts also to the heads of departments.

Regarding speeding up disposal of business in the secretariat departments it recommended that:

1. In order to discourage even routine matters being submitted to secretaries, broad

categories of business may be identified to be disposed of or circulated at the level of
joint or deputy secretary so as to simultaneously facilitate enough time for secretary to
Government for considering major issues of policy;
2. In respect of matters circulated by a deputy secretary or a joint secretary, discussions with
the minister desired by him if any, should be had at that level in order to enable them to
effectively handle the subjects without involving the secretary except for information;
3. Secretaries to Government shall have at least bi-monthly meetings with the Heads of
Departments under them on policy matters, programms or other major items of work
pending with either of them. Similarly, JS / DS shall have meetings with the officers of
Heads of Departments every month to expedite papers pending with either of them. The
JS / DS shall have monthly meetings with their counter parts in the advisory departments.
With a view to ensure that these meetings are held in a purposeful manner, it should be a
pre-condition a list of cases or subjects which are proposed to be discussed should be
circulated in advance at these meetings;
4. Each department should identify subjects that should invariably be initiated at the level of
section officers and assistant secretaries;
5. Simultaneously level jumping should be introduced skipping one level in the hierarchy;
6. The ratio of assistant secretaries to sections should be reduced to 1 : 3;

55
 7. Departments should primarily concern itself with matters of policy and review of
programme and policy implementation without encroaching on the natural domain of the
Heads of Departments; and
8. Entertaining petitions at the secretariat should be discouraged simultaneously ensuring
the responsible disposal of the same at the level of Heads of Departments and Collectors.

G Ram Reddy and G Haragopal Study, 1983

This study found a number of distortions in the functions of secretariat and heads of departments
and too much overlapping of functions causing delay and duplication like the following:

i) The political Executive has come to evince greater interest in administration rather than policy;
ii) Strong tendency in the secretariat for centralization of powers;
iii) General disposition to avoid decision making;
iv) Heads of departments being subjected to whims and fancies of the secretariat with the
resultant absence of trust, unequal status, inaccessibility to the political Executive and lack of
decision making powers, particularly financial, weakening the heads of departments;
v) Absence of a systems approach in tackling the problem leading to neglect and helplessness
situation of the field agencies;
vi) Absence of coordination at different levels (a) as a result of lack of clarity and cohesion in
public policies (b) irrational division of work in the administration (c) fortification of vertical
linkages at the cost of horizontal coordination and (d) non cooperation arising as a consequence
on the part of the administrative agencies;
vii) Paradoxical situation of centralized power at the top runs of the secretariat with excessive
reliance on the clerical levels for prompt initiation of action and analysis of issues which they are
incapable of;
viii) Absence of monitoring and evaluation of development work;
ix) Outdated rules, procedures and structures etc;
In order to remedy the situation the study made the following excellent recommendations:
(a) Enhancing policy capacity at the hands of the political Executive and educating them on the
concepts and mechanics of administration at policy levels.
(b) Replacing adhoc public policies with conflicting emphasis with a long range perspective and
clarity and cohesion in the formulation of public policies.
(c) Clear cut role differentiation between policy and implementation
(d) Following the recommendations of the Administration Reforms Commission of Government
of India (i) division of administration into different sectors like General Administration,
Regulatory Administration, Development Administration, Welfare Administration and
Development of Weaker Sections (ii) senior civil servants (generalists and specialists) being
given choice of branches categorized as above to gain insight, experience and competence in the
chosen field (iii) placing each sector within the secretariat under a Principal Secretary with
powers of coordination in respect of that sector to relieve the chief secretary who is already
overburdened to facilitate greater coordination by having a core team of the Chief Secretary with
five Principal Secretaries in charge of the sectors in the secretariat and in the field (iv) similar
sectoral division and coordination at the implementation level of the heads of departments
nominating senior officers as Directors General. (v) Similar reorganization of district
administration on sectoral lines with overall coordination of the District Collector.

56
(vi) Decentralization of powers down the line
e) Recourse to research input from universities and other research organizations by constituting
study cells in the Office of the Principal Secretary to assist in policy in order to improve policy
capacity.
f) Replacement of ministerial staff by officer oriented administration through desk officers
system.

M K Rustomji and Associates, 1986

The report of M K Rustomji and Associates covers a range of subjects of which examination of
the procedures of methods of work in Government offices including the secretariat was done to
suggest simplified procedures to avoid delay and inconvenience to public. Among a series of
recommendations, the following may be noted:

1) As part of restructuring of the Secretariat it recommended a new Public Relations and

Cultural Affairs Department, apart from expressing the opinion that the Education
Department should not be bifurcated, and that the Irrigation Utilization and Command
Area Development Department and the Irrigation Department should be brought
together;
2) In order to weed old cases of more than one year out, an old cases clearance week
was suggested to be initiated at the level of the Deputy Secretary;
3) A separate cell in the Law Department to deal with writ petitions on the analogy of
the Punjab was suggested;
4) The introduction of desk officer system on a systematic basis was advised pending
which level jumping was advised to be strictly enforced;
5) A tax research wing was advised in the Finance Department;
6) It recommended the appointment of Engineers as secretaries in the Engineering
Departments;
7) A special study group on the lines of the Central Policy Review Staff in the UK for
identification and evaluation of priorities and policies was advised;
8) Every department shall have a joint secretary or deputy secretary nominated as
internal training officer to train staff of the department every month, during working
hours on importance of work, role of secretariat procedures and the subjects of the
department;
9) The lay out of the secretariat departments was suggested to be altered on the basis of
a detailed work study;
10) Weeding out old records and micro filming of records in course of time was proposed
along with provision of a record room in each department;
11) A reception centre at the secretariat to provide guidance to visitors was a citizen
friendly recommendation.

Ramamurthy Committee, 1990

This committee advised for consideration of Government :

1) A detailed exercise by each secretariat department of the present status of delegation of
powers in respect of each of the offices of heads of departments with reference to the

57
 various departmental functions discharged by them at different levels with a view to
reducing the levels of decision making. This was advised to be done on a time bound
basis by a committee under the chairmanship of each secretary to Government with a
secretary from the Finance and Planning department and the concerned head of
department may be required to make recommendations in two months;
2) The committee urged the Government to consider implementing the G.O.Ms. No. 471
GAD dated 15.9.1986 kept in abeyance to further decentralize the powers of the
department in regard to service matters in order to reduce the excessive pre-occupation of
the departments of secretariat and officers of Heads of Departments now with routine
service matters resulting in lot of waste of time;
3) Petitions should not be entertained at the secretariat, particularly ones rejected earlier, to
decongest the secretariat;
4) Matters which may be disposed of at the head of department level should be disposed of
as such;
5) The secretariat should be confined to the matters of policy;
6) The minister shall delegate functions to the secretaries and heads of departments
following the rules;
7) In order to effectively introduce the desk officer system the committee recommended:

a) A careful study of the subjects dealt with in each section and its classification between
routine subjects and substantive subjects and subjects amenable to desk functions;
b) That routine functions and non-desk functions could be attached to conventional sections
to be dealt with in the conventional way;
c) That such functions could be handled by an assistant section officer should be identified
and their routing pattern specified jumping the level of the section officer;
d) That competent officers capable of functioning as desk officers with stenographic
assistance may be identified for being appointed as desk officers. They could be section
officers or assistant secretaries or even deputy secretaries;
e) Functions amenable to desk handling may be allocated depending on their relative
importance to the section officer, desk officer or assistant secretary desk officer or deputy
secretary desk officer as the case may be;
f) That files dealt with by section officer desk officer should go to the deputy secretary and
files dealt with by assistant secretary desk officer to secretary; and
g) Where it is felt that desk officer system is not possible in respect of certain functions, the
principle of level jumping could be introduced by either of two ways viz., (i) subjects
may be so allocated to each section in such a way that, that section reports directly to the
deputy secretary (ii) subjects in the section may be allocated as subjects which should go
to the assistant secretary and subjects which should go to the deputy secretary.

Reports of Other States

A brief reference here to the initiatives being undertaken in the field of public sector reform
currently in other states of the country would be helpful to identify measures that are being
considered and adopted in those states. Among the most recent reports which cover public sector
reforms of the entire Government machinery the reports of the Assam Administrative Reforms
Committee- 2005 and the High Power Committee chaired by Sukthankar appointed by the

58
Maharashtra Government are noteworthy. The Assam Commission has examined in detail
certain aspects relating to reform of the secretariat and made elaborate recommendations relating
to introduction of desk officer system, streamlining the work flow by reducing number of levels
to a maximum of three including approval, simplification, updation and publication of the
secretariat manual, orientation training to new entrants, refresher course at periodic intervals,
major E-governance initiatives, rationalization of secretariat departments, facilitation counters
for visitors to the secretariat and arrangements for effective redressal of public grievances,
performance appraisal, preparation of job charts for employees at all levels, etc.

The Maharashtra Report deals more with public management reforms to introduce better
governance in the light of contemporary initiatives in the field of public management reform
involving new public management and governance. The Committee had the following to say in
respect of subjects within the purview of this study:

1) Reduction in the number of ministries and departments and revamping of work

procedures to make them more officer oriented to take Government organization
back to what obtained a decade or two ago;
2) Computerization, office automation and changes in systems of file management,
particularly at the lower level of clerical and junior supervisory positions;
3) Substantial reduction of support staff with introduction of common office support
services for stenography and manual assistance;
4) Redeployment of surplus personnel through retraining;
5) Liberal voluntary retirement packages;
6) Automatic abolition of posts vacant for more than six months and 20% reduction
of staff in ten years;
7) Dispensing with the practice of creation of posts solely for the purpose of cadre
management, the level of posts being determined by functional requirement and
not as a means of providing avenues of advancement and promotion;
8) In-built provision for retrenchment if staff found surplus;
9) Alternate means of service delivery and quality improvement in service;
10) Introduction of Chartermark initiative of UK;
11) Introduction of expenditure reforms; and
12) Legislation for regulation of transfer.

The World Bank has undertaken a macro level study of modern initiatives with particular
reference to economic development titled Economic Growth and Poverty Alleviation in Tamil
Nadu A World Bank Study. The study found that like in many Indian States, the process of
decision making is cumbersome and involves a large volume of paper work and multiple and
often duplicating layers in Tamil Nadu Secretariat to simplify which, accepting the
recommendation of State Expenditure Reforms Commission which reviewed the functioning of
the secretariat, to introduce level jumping and single file system. A comprehensive E-
governance strategy is under formulation to increase transparency, improve efficiency and speed
up decision making.

The study had the following recommendation in respect of strengthening budget formulation,
execution, accounting and accountability to Legislature:

59
Budget and Policy Formulation
Strengthening policy formulation

Establish an apex Policy Reform Committee linked to a network of policy research

institutes/universities to upgrade quality of policy proposals.
Establish an annual forum with stakeholders to report on development progress and to
invite comments on proposed policy initiatives.

Strengthening budget formulation

As a priority, develop capacity to undertake multi-year revenue forecasting in

Department of Finance.
Formalize the functioning of a standing Expenditure Review Committee as part of the
annual process of reviewing budget submissions to eliminate unproductive programs and
improve efficiency of existing programs.
Ensure budget preparation process encompass expenditures due to all "new policy,
provision of a new facility, or any substantial alteration in character or extent of an
existing facility."
Eliminate policies or schemes that violate established budgetary review and vetting
process.
Initiate time-bound implementation of expenditure rationalization recommendations of
the Staff and Expenditure Reform Commission.
Establish a working group to (a) develop recommendations on rationalization and
accessibility of budget documentation and (b) update the budget manual.
Initiate Zero-Base Review of Schemes and programs; close those with doubtful benefits
and merge others, which are similar in nature post review.
Adjust budget schedule to ensure that the Appropriation Act is passed by the beginning of
the fiscal year.

Strengthening budget execution

Initiate and complete a full review of budget execution procedures (cash management,
release of cash or letters of credit and payment, control processes, predictability and
scope for departmental virement) to identify factors that contribute to under-spending,
arrears, end of year spike in spending, etc. Implement recommendations from such
review.
Introduce quarterly circulars providing departments with information on anticipated cash
disbursement/letter of credit limits for next quarter.
Delegate greater financial powers to allow managers more discretion in managing inputs.
Departments with greater authority over discrete blocks of budget appropriation and
increasing the unit of parliamentary appropriation.

60
Improving fiscal accounting

Adopt a clear and internationally standard definition of the fiscal deficit to be reported in
the fiscal accounts.
Initiate improvements to accounting system within the current system.
Prepare and publish regular reports on fiscal and revenue deficit.
Monitor and report payment obligations, arrears and guarantees issued.
Discourage and limit transfer of resources from consolidated fund of the state to the
public account.
Improve timeliness and comprehensiveness of reconciliation of accounts across treasury,
department and accountant general.
Develop and implement a medium term strategy for networked computerization of
financial transactions and records and adoption of department-based financial
management.
Improve and strengthen the internal audit function.

Improving accountability to Legislature

Ensure more complete and prompt departmental responses to audit paragraphs.

Avoid delays in obtaining ex post legislative authorization of expenditure in excess of
appropriation.

61
 Chapter 4

Findings and Recommendations

Impact of Expanding Role

The State has acquired over time new roles, functions and responsibilities from one of being a
predominantly regulatory state to an all round developmental and welfare state extending its
sphere of activity to economic, social, welfare, infrastructure development, manufacturing and
even trading. These developments have led to an unprecedented expansion of the machinery of
Government, as already elaborated, into all sectors in general at all levels, including the centre of
the Government, ie the secretariat. This unbridled growth in the size, structure and complexities
of the machinery including the number of public servants has resulted in acute fiscal crisis,
compounded problems of coordination, severely tested implementation capacity, accentuated
regulatory issues, made corruption systemic, led to colossal leakage of resources and declining
standards of service delivery.

Reform Trends

A number of developments in the last quarter century have speeded up initiatives to reform the
way the Government is run, to contain the growth of Government machinery and to reduce size
of the bureaucracy. Prominent among these are the trend towards globalization of markets and
liberalization of regulations; advances in science and technology; particularly information
communication technologies; and e-governance initiatives; and the movement towards rights
based development initiatives; and the emergence of vibrant advocacy and participatory civil
society bodies seeking control of corruption, by increasing transparency and accountability and
participation in the process of governance, and efficiency and ethical standards in the conduct of
public affairs. As rightly indicated in a UNDP document on civil service reform international
economic trends in particular in trade movements of both capital and labor, the liberalization of
markets and unfettered exchanges of information across borders have created complex new
interdependencies that national systems must recognize, adopt to and manage. These trends
have altered the context in which Government functions, and the manner in which they are
required to operate and begun to change the structure of Government and the framework of
public services to meet new economic, social and political challenges within the constraints of
political and cultural context of each country.

Structural Adjustment Initiatives

The structural adjustment initiatives pioneered as conditionality for aid by international

development assistance agencies has as its major components, reduction of the size of the State
through privatization, and the cost of Government as a solution to the looming fiscal crisis faced
by developing countries. A parallel and somewhat complementary development in public
administration reform is the introduction of private sector management principles of competition,
marketization, autonomization, disaggregation and deregulation to Government organizations.
Administrative reforms focuses on rationalizing structures of Government. It creates strategic
mechanisms and processes for policy and decision making coordination; for literally reforming

62
institutions for the delivery of services, sometimes through contractual arrangements with civil
society and private sector organizations; for improving delivery mechanisms within core public
sectors and broader contexts; and for other means to strengthen processes and procedures for
effective, efficient, economical and ethical management (UNDP Civil Service Reform).

New Public Management

The key components of New Public Management initiative, in the words of Charles Polidano, are
deregulation of line management; conversion of civil service departments into free standing
agencies or enterprises (corporatization); performance based accountability, particularly through
contracts; and competitive mechanisms such as contracting out and internal markets.
Privatization and downsizing already mentioned above, which are considered as the first stage of
public sector reform, are also treated as part of this package. New Public Management seeks to
move away from accountability for inputs, in the sense of strict adherence to the rules relating to
spending and staffing, towards accountability for performance or output.

Responsive Governance

The latest trend is the emerging concept of responsive governance with its emphasis on an all
inclusive framework not only for administrative and civil service reforms but also as a link
between civil service reform and all embracing framework of making policy decisions effective
within viable system of accountability and citizen participation (World Bank). To quote a UN
document governance reform tends to refer to the improvement of legal and policy frameworks
to create proper decision making environments; participatory systems for elements of civil
society to become actively involved in policy and programme formulation and their
implementation; and an effective and transparent system and process for control and
accountability in Government activities. In both administrative and governance reforms, civil
service reforms are essential to reshaping the behaviour of human beings in initiating and
managing all these changes sustainably (UNDP Civil Service Reform).

While public management draws its inspiration from efficiency, responsive governance concept
focuses on creating public value and promotes constructive interaction between the State, the
private sector and the civil society. The governance model emphasizes a Government that is
open and responsive to civil society, more accountable and better regulated by external
watchdogs and the law. A strong role is proposed for voice and for civil society partnerships
through non-Governmental organizations and community participation. The governance model
thus seeks to incorporate and include citizens in all their stakeholder roles rather than simply as
satisfying customers. It relies more on network than on hierarchy, relies less on direct provision
and Government authority and more on self regulation and partnerships. Whereas NPM focused
on both the bottom line and the customer, responsive governance, depicts complex forms of 360
degree accountability in which there are multiple stakeholders in both Government and society,
all of whom have a claim to be heard and answered. Another strand of this development
concerns the application of Information Communication Technologies as a model of responsive
governance in so far as it makes it possible to have a more dispersed but at the same time a more
informed and transparent process of decision making. In some, the combination of new

63
governance and the information revolution creates a vision of public policy and administration
that requires new combinations of expertise, accountability and responsiveness.

Reform Initiatives in A.P. Secretariat

In the light of the foregoing trends an attempt is made to identify areas of possible reform of
structure, systems, processes and procedures and personnel of the Andhra Pradesh Government
Secretariat. The areas of reform could cover in particular:

1) The role of the political executive vis--vis the staff and line functions of the permanent
administrative machinery;
2) The place of local self governing institutions vis--vis the provisions of statute as the
third tier of Government;
3) The allocation of subjects / functions between departments of Government at the
secretariat and within departments with particular emphasis on effective, coordination
between (a) core oversight departments and the subject or sector departments, (b) among
sector departments themselves and (c) within individual departments;
4) The possibility of giving up unnecessary functions through privatization, outsourcing,
contracting etc;
5) Rationalizing repetitive functions;
6) Strengthening core functions of the secretariat;
7) The relations between the secretariat and outside agencies viz., (a) field agencies (b)
private sector and (c) civil society
8) Internal structure of departments;
9) Civil service reforms;
10) The process of transaction of Business of the Council of Ministers; secretariat procedure;
and departmental procedures;
11) Infrastructure and communication including E-governance initiatives;
12) Improving capacity for (a) strategic and operational policy making and ensuring their
link to the budget, (b) horizontal coordination of policy making, developing a scientific process
for setting the policy making agenda and to ensure the fit of the proposals with each other and
with the Governments priorities, (c) disseminating policy decisions and monitoring of
Government performance to ensure that it collectively performs effectively and meets public
aspirations; and
13) Building in priorities like public administration reform in the system

Why the Secretariat?

While examining issues relating to restructuring of the Government secretariat one often
encounters the preliminary question of the need for such an institution in its present form and
what should its basic purpose, functions and major concerns be. Those who plead for a thorough
overhaul of the machinery plead for its integration with the heads of departments. Rather than
canvassing for integration of the sector departments with the heads of departments in its charge,
some analysts have advocated the system of a partial merger by way of according ex-officio
status to the heads of departments as secretaries to Government in respect of the subjects in their
charge by and large seeking to overcome the shortcomings of the present system. One thing that

64
emerges undoubtedly from these deliberations is the need for effecting substantial restructuring
of the secretariat as it functions today in order to improve its efficiency and effectiveness to
enable it to fulfil the objectives for which the secretariat came into existence.

As has been briefly alluded to earlier, the secretariat is the centre of the executive branch of
Government where the political executive which secures the mandate of the electorate for a
specified term seeks to implement its manifesto in the course of governance with the assistance
of the permanent civil service representing the administrative wing of the executive branch. The
staff function of assisting in the analysis, formulation and coordination of policy, its
operationalization through the planning process, budget mechanism and management direction
and control, effective communication with the other wings of Government, the citizens, the
private sector and civil society, oversight of implementation through appropriate feedback,
monitoring and evaluation of policy, programmes and service delivery and in turn streamlining
the policies in the light of experience gained from the field are performed by the secretariat. The
role of the centre of Government is particularly significant in respect of coherent across the
board coordination of whole of Government objectives through integrated central policy. In
this it has the major task of being the final arbiter of executive conflicts that arise among
different parts of the Government machinery entrusted with specific tasks. As observed in an
OECD paper the main challenge is how to coordinate the desperate parts of Government into a
coherent whole through effective exercise of appropriate levers of control without encroaching
on the legitimate tasks assigned to field agencies. In this view of the matter the centre of
Government, that is the secretariat, undertakes crucial and inevitable functions; and is therefore a
necessary and appropriate structure.

Coordinating Departments and Subject Departments

The secretariat can be said to comprise two parts viz., the core of the centre comprising the
overarching, coordinating departments of Government viz., the General Administration
Department which discharges the functions of the Cabinet Secretariat, assisting the Chief
Minister and the Council of Ministers in the discharge of its collective responsibility as the
Government, the personnel department, the governance and public management department in
charge of governance reforms, among others; the Finance Department in charge of the Budget,
the Treasury and Accounts; the Planning Department dealing with formulation and monitoring of
mid term and annual plans; the Law and Legislative Affairs department which seeks to ensure
the functioning of Government within the constitutional frame and securing legal conformity in
its legislative and executive work; the Legislature Department, though not exactly a secretariat
department being a part and parcel of the Legislature assisting in the Legislative process and
Executive accountability to the Legislature; the Public Enterprises Department; and part of the
Information Communication and Technology Department, to the extent it concerns E-
governance initiatives. Surrounding the core coordinating departments are the sectoral or subject
departments in charge of sectoral policy and oversight of implementation in respect of subjects
assigned to them under the Business Rules. The line function of implementation of policy and
programmes is in the legitimate realm of the field administrative agencies which now comprise a
wide variety of organizations starting with statutory authorities, heads of departments, the
corporate and other agencies.

65
Combining Line and Staff?

Noting the significant differences in characteristics of the coordinating departments and the
sector departments there could be a suggestion that the sector departments could be integrated
with the respective field agencies or indirectly linked through the ex-officio system referred to
earlier, as is already the case in regard to departments basically concerned with implementation,
with only peripheral responsibility for policy, particularly in respect of subjects of vital concern
where speed in implementation is of utmost importance; like Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer
Affairs department and the sub-department of Relief in the Revenue department. While there is
merit in this suggestion it cannot be said in any manner that it can be extended wholesale to
totally dispense with all sectoral departments. Till the end of 1970s when stand alone Next Step
Agencies or Executive Agencies were set up, the United Kingdom had integrated line
ministries directly in charge of implementation. Here one should not forget the fact that the field
functions there are mostly discharged by the local bodies. The situation in the country in general
and the States in particular is such that direct charge of implementation together with policy
formulation cannot be considered a feasible proposition as the States are geographically and
population wise many times more than the size of a number of independent countries. Bihar
which had an integrated system initially is actually falling in line with the rest of the states. The
secretariat is in fact the focal point of link between the political executive and the administrative
machinery at the head quarters and in the field, between policy and implementation, generalist
and specialist administrators, the executive Government and other arms of the State and the
outside world; and these links cannot be easily substituted and will have to continue in view of
the basic soundness of the present system which has stood the test of time. What is required is to
identify the factors which have blurred this distinction and reduced its effectiveness and to
device corrective steps to enable it to discharge the respective functions efficiently and
effectively.

Increasing Number and Size of Departments

What strikes one most is the fact that the secretariat has grown exponentially in size and number
creating increasing problems of coordination which is its basic purpose. As against 9
departments at the time of formation of the State, today there are 31 departments with
overlapping jurisdictions. Not only the number but also the size of departments has been
growing over time with increase in number of secretaries in individual departments themselves
as has already been noted earlier, creating not only interdepartmental issues of coordination but
also intra departmental issues of coordination and coherence of policy. Some countries have
tried to counter this trend by a reduction in the number of ministries. The number of ministries
in the UK is at present 16. In Asia the number, on an average, hovers around 30 with Malaysia
having 25, The Republic of Korea 26 and Japan 16 ministries. Considering the size of
population and geographical area and the manifold increase in the role of Government and the
aspirations of the citizens in general and special interest of particular sections of population
whose voice had hitherto remained feeble and unheard, reasonable increase in the number of
departments and in the size of ministries themselves cannot be called in question. However, the
internal cohesion and integration of functions within each department should not be lost sight of.

66
Care is to be taken to ensure that this growth in number and relative size of departments
including the number of secretaries and other subordinate personnel manning these departments
is not allowed to increase any further. As a United Nations document has pointed out the
critical point is to retain the viability and integrity of a ministry by keeping all the closely related
activities in the context of a Governments priorities within one administrative structure which
enables ministry or departmental officials to carry out their responsibilities efficiently and to be
held accountable for their performance.

Central Pattern of Ministry and Departments Within

To briefly recapitulate of the 31 departments of secretariat today, 7 are wholly or partly

coordinating departments, 4 are regulatory departments, and the rest development and welfare
departments. The development and welfare departments comprise departments relating to
sectors like agricultural and allied services, industry and infrastructure, social sector, welfare and
regional development. As indicated in the introductory portion of this paper, the machinery of
the central secretariat is composed of ministries with or without individual departments within
them, headed by Cabinet ministers and assisted at times by ministers of state / deputy ministers.
There could be stand alone departments in charge of Ministers of State with independent charge
also. Some of the major ministries in the Central Secretariat comprise a group of individual
departments. For example the Ministry of Defence comprises the departments of:

a) Defence;
b) Defence Production;
c) Defence Research and Development;
d) Ex-servicemen Welfare; and
e) Finance (Defence)

The Defence Secretary, apart from being the Secretary of the Department of Defence also has the
responsibility of coordinating all the departments in the Ministry and reporting to the Defence
Minister.

In the case of Andhra Pradesh it is stipulated that where there is more than one secretary in a
department, the senior most among them will function as the head of the whole secretariat
department entrusted with the coordinating function. This instruction not withstanding, the
efficacy of which is in doubt, the presence of more than one secretary in a department leads to
problems of coordination between them and issues of control of administrative matters. There is
a possibility of official coordination function within the department being kicked up to the level
of the minister in charge. There could be a further problem if the charge is in the hands of more
than one minister.

This arrangement of grouping a number of departments within a ministry in charge of a sector is

a desirable alternative to be examined in this State in the context of proliferating number of
departments within the same sector. For example there are five separate welfare departments
today starting with one in the 1970s. A welfare ministry with departments in charge of social
welfare, tribal welfare, backward class welfare etc can be a holistic arrangement under a Special
Chief Secretary in charge of major issues of policy, coordination and internal administration with

67
secretaries in charge of each sub-sector. There could be a similar arrangement for infrastructure
and industry, area development and the like sectors. In so far as the agriculture and allied
services sector is concerned, already there is a titular head designated as the Agriculture
Production Commissioner which has remained a sinecure all along as a result of the nature of the
present division of powers and work and unwillingness on the part of secretaries to accept such a
coordinating functionary. This is not in the interest of administration. This was a failed but a
laudable proposition; but which should be made to succeed. Such an arrangement is also
desirable from the point of view of line of command also. Of 64 secretaries in the secretariat
departments 31 are Principal Secretaries and 7are Special Chief Secretaries. In keeping with their
rank, status and experience, it should not be difficult for the Government to bring in such a
superior coordinating level leaving operational responsibilities with the respective secretaries
reporting to him. A similar recommendation was made earlier by a study team under Prof G
Ram Reddy and Dr G Haragopal in a report commissioned by the State Administrative Reforms
Commission 1982-83 when they advised that for the purposes of coordination each sector
within the secretariat should be headed by a Principal Secretary who should be made responsible
to coordinate the activities within the sector. In the present system, it is reported, that the Chief
Secretary is so much over burdened that he is not able to secure effective coordination for want
of time. The Chief Secretary along with five Principal Secretaries would constitute a team which
should be in charge of the coordination of innumerable tasks that secretariat deals with. This in
fact was an echo of the recommendation of Administration Reforms Commission of the
Government of India 1966 where the commission recommended the division of administration
into various sectors. This argument is even more relevant today when one considers the near
impossibility of coordination of 64 secretaries reporting to the Chief Secretary. Unlike in the
central ministries which are almost autonomous within the policy framework laid down, state
departments are not that autonomous and are heavily dependent on the Chief Secretary and the
Chief Minister which necessitates even greater coordination and cohesion of policy.

Identity of Portfolio and Department

It would be ideal if there is identity of ministerial portfolios and departments in their charge
without overlap of jurisdiction and allied functions are allocated to a single department. The
composition of departments in Andhra Pradesh remains by and large unaltered where, unlike in
some other countries, ordinarily no new departments are created and reallocation of subjects
made between departments when a new ministry assumes office creating attendant uncertainties.
New departments are created not for accommodating ministers but for focusing on new policy
priorities or disadvantaged population groups or backward areas needing special plans and
priorities as has happened recently in the case of the Rain Shadow Area Development
Department. This provides the much needed durability and continuity to departments and avoids
unnecessary dislocation by way of movement of staff.

The Chief Secretary to Government can play a very significant role in suitably advising the new
Chief Minister who assumes charge after a fresh election in regard to administratively
convenient division of departments among ministers or allocation of allied group of departments
where a minister happens to be given charge of more than one department which the Chief
Minister can take into account while allocating portfolios among ministers based on political
factors. If a single department is allocated to more than a minister it would be worthwhile

68
considering whether a Minister of State could be given charge of the less important part of the
department. In so far as certain big departments have more than one secretary allocation could
take care to see that a secretary reports to one minister rather than simultaneously to the different
ministers in the same department. The recent initiative of ensuring that the minister in charge of
the department is housed in the same building where the department is located is a step in the
right direction. In short, the allocation of portfolios and allocation of business to the departments
should, as far as practicable complement each other and be consistent with and conducive to
homogenous functioning and unitary control of the departments.

Reallocation of Subjects

The present allotment of subjects to departments is examined for possible reallocations within
this broad sectoral set up and guideline in view. The case of coordination departments is
examined to start with. The General Administration Department is the very core of secretariat
departments having administrative control over the entire secretariat, being in charge of cabinet
affairs, governance and public management, and political and managerial coordination. Certain
functions involving servicing the entire secretariat and the Government continue to be in other
departments like Printing and Stationery in the Home department and Gazetteers and Archives in
the Education department. These subjects could be brought under the General Administration
Department. Acknowledging the principle that regulatory authorities and Ombudsman and
oversight agencies overseeing functions of specific departments or the Government as a whole
should not be attached to the administrative department concerned as in the case of Government
of India for instance where Railway Safety is not kept in the charge of Railway ministry. On the
same analogy, agencies like the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Authority, the ST, SC,
BC etc commissions, State Election Commission and the like should be administratively brought
within the charge of the General Administration Department so that they are not made dependent
on these departments which are regulated by them for their administrative needs so as not to be
under any obligation or quid pro quo. These should in fact be in charge of the Chief Minister.
E-Governance initiatives is a subject assigned to the IT&C department today and to that extent it
is now a part of the coordinating departments. This subject rightly belongs to the governance
and public management wing of the General Administration Department in so far as e-
Government is more about Government than about electronics, the fundamental principle of
computerization being that process reengineering should be done first before digitalizing the
process. The A P Technology Services, like the Commissionerate of Printing & Stationery is a
servicing department servicing the entire secretariat and as such should rightly be attached to the
GAD. Public Enterprises used to be a part of GAD. In so far as it is in charge of all corporate
and cooperative enterprises owned or controlled by the Government with major focus on
privatization initiatives could be considered for being reattached to the General Administration
Department. It is recalled in this context that the Public Enterprises Management Board in
charge of overall policy and coordination was chaired by the Chief Secretary and for a period by
the Chief Minister himself. In this view of the matter this is also a subject rightly within the
purview of the Chief Minister.

Finance and Planning Departments constituted a single department for long till recently which
has now been bifurcated and made two independent departments. There is a strong case for
reversing this decision and having an integrated finance & planning department with integrated

69
expenditure control to avoid separate references in respect of plan schemes to both these
departments leading to avoidable delay. Such an arrangement is also more conducive to a well
integrated realistic budget and a fully resourced plan. Finance Projects Wing Department which
discharges the functions of a FA in charge of engineering departments is an independent
department attached in some ways to the parent finance department. As would be further
examined later there is a strong case for integrated financial advisers attached to individual
departments in the State as is the case in Government of India including a full Department of
Finance in the Ministry of Defence. Once the system of internal financial advisers introduced,
the independent existence of this department will cease.

Revenue, Expenditure and Economic Affairs are major departments within the Ministry of
Finance in the Government of India. But in Andhra Pradesh, Revenue is part of the Revenue
Department. All tax resources of the Government like Commercial Tax, Excise Duty,
Registration & Stamp Duty are subjects rightly within the purview of Finance Department and
could be considered for being transferred to the Finance Department as a sub-department of
Revenue within Finance, the remaining subjects unrelated to revenue resources being left in the
revenue department with a new name. This would have salutary and positive impact on the
residuary land department in which the primary subject of land rights, reforms and the like have
been hitherto receiving scant attention.

Where as Law department is in charge of Law, Legislative Affairs and Justice certain sections
dealing with courts, justice, prosecutions etc continues to operate from the Home department and
the General Administration Department for which there is no justification. Similarly, Labour
Courts are part of the Labour, Employment and Technical Education which rightly belongs to the
Law. These could be considered for transfer to Law department.

Being primarily regulatory Drug Control and Food and Drug Administration, now in the charge
of the Health, Medical and Family Welfare Department could be allocated to the department of
subjects of the Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department. This would have the
added advantage of coordinated inspection and supervision of Weights & Measures, price
controls and adulteration with possible reduction of the number of inspections, improvement in
effectiveness and reduction of possible harassment of dealers by multiple inspections. As a
matter of fact there are countries which have a unified system of inspections. Back in Andhra
Pradesh itself, we have the Directorate General of Vigilance & Enforcement which has multiple
powers under different departments and enactments.

Employment component of Labour, Employment, and Training Department in fact deals with
registration of unemployed through the Directorate of Employment and Training which looks
after the Employment Exchanges and ITIs. Employment Exchanges as they function now are
linked solely to public sector employment. So registration of unemployed in these exchanges has
lost its significance in view of the substantial scaling down of recruitment in Government and
public enterprises through them. There is a strong case for a major focus and concentrated
attention on employment in all sectors and proactive involvement in career guidance and
centralized data exchange on employment opportunities in private, public and self employment
sectors in the areas of industries and services unlike the present emphasis on mere registration of
unemployed for being sponsored for notified vacancies in the public sector, appointment out of

70
which is not legally mandatory, on the lines of the new agency in the United Kingdom called the
Job Centre Plus. In fact there is a case for expanding the scope of this department and
considering bringing all employment programmes under one department.

Separation of construction of water projects from water utilization and Command Area
Development for irrigation, industry and domestic and commercial use are entirely different
disciplines which continue to be together incongruously depriving the users of the benefits of
separation of these two functions. The Irrigation and Command Area Development should in
fact be a Water Resources Department in comprehensive charge of ground and surface water
resources seeking to achieve the conservation and conjunctive use of water resources for all three
purposes of drinking, irrigation and industrial use.

Projects Wing Department is shown as a separate wing of the main department as is the case
with School Education and Higher Education in the schedule to the Business Rules, the
significance of which is not clear. It appears these two departments have been by now unified
and bifurcated more than once. Preferably the two should be treated as a single integrated
department in so far as other departments having more than one secretary are also listed as single
departments irrespective of the number of secretaries.

Recently a new department of Rain Shadow Area Development has been constituted. In addition
a secretary was appointed in charge of remote area development in the General Administration
Department. Godavari Valley Development Authority is in planning and Shore Area
Development Authority is attached to Environment. All these could be brought under a generic
area development department. The question here is the overlap of functions between this
department and the Rural Development Department attached to Panchayat Raj.

The above scheme of departmental restructuring could facilitate a better unified control structure
conducive to increased coordination and more harmonious pursuit of whole of Government
objectives consistent with wider policy concerns. The line departments or the subject
departments as they may be called, when grouped on the lines of sectors mentioned in the above
can be placed in the charge of Special Chief Secretaries / Principal Secretaries depending on
their previous experience, knowledge and expertise in the sector concerned. The intention here
is not to create an extra level of decision making but to enable the Chief Minister and Chief
Secretary to look to the Special Chief Secretaries or Chief Secretaries in charge of sectoral
departments instead of having to rely on a large number of individual secretaries independently
reporting to them taking issues of interdepartmental conflicts to them for solution rather than
offering solutions expected of them at that level.

Right-sizing of Machinery

The basic objective of strengthening secretariat machinery is to make it a strong (rather than big),
efficient and cost effective instrument for achieving the goals set for it. Measures proposed to
trim the machinery and to substantially improve the way Government works could include:

71
 a) Dispensing with unnecessary functions and privatization of functions which do not fall
within or rightly belong to Government and outsourcing or contracting out services that
can be more cost effectively secured from outside;
b) Devolving functions which fall within the realm of and legitimately belong to local self-
governing institutions to them;
c) Delegation of powers and functions from :

i) The Council of Ministers to Cabinet Committees, Chief Minister and Ministers;

ii) The minister in charge to the administrative level within the Government secretariat
to the secretary to Government;
iii) Financial, personnel, legal and administrative delegations from the coordinating
departments to the sector departments in charge of implementation of policy and
programmes; and
iv) Substantive and effective administrative delegation of implementation function which
structurally belongs to the field agencies headed by the heads of departments, chief
executives of corporate entities and other agencies created for that specific purpose;

d) De-concentration of power
i) Within the secretariat from the secretary to the lower levels; and
ii) From the heads of departments etc to the field functionaries

e) Streamlining repetitive house keeping functions of internal administration of the

secretariat and instituting further shared services;
f) Re-engineering departmental administrative processes by liberalization, simplification,
rationalization and eventual computerization; and
g) Strengthening capacity for core functions of the secretariat

Privatization

The Maharashtra Administrative Reforms Committee has the following to say on trimming the
role and size of the Government.

Today the State does too much too poorly and too expensively. It must be laid down that the
State shall do what it alone can do and shall do it well. In the minimalist view, the State is
expected to provide a framework of an orderly society with a structure of laws within which
citizens can pursue their legitimate goals in life. Thus, the State is based on a social contract
whereby individuals authorize the State to do what they cannot do individually and what requires
the coercive power of the State. Essentially, therefore, the core of governance would consist of
law and order, delivery of justice and essential regulatory functions (defence and currency are
being left out because they fall in the federal domain). In addition, the State is also called upon to
play a role in providing what economists term merit goods and services. These represent the
classical case of positive externalities where social benefit exceeds private gain. Markets alone
may have little monetary and profit incentive to provide these desirable goods and services.
Hence, there is a case for subsidizing some of these goods and services. Primary education, basic
health services and preventive medicine, social security and poverty alleviation programmes, etc.
would fall in this category. Preservation of the environment would also qualify for similar

72
treatment and also call for regulatory State action to harmonize social and private costs and
benefits. In the third category are goods or services the responsibility for providing which
devolves on the State because of the difficulty of excluding the non-payer. This is the traditional
lighthouse dilemma, and explains the case for local Government provision of street lighting,
parks, gardens and the like. . If the role of the State were redefined on the basis of the test
of what the State alone can do, and compared with its present set of activities, the fit would be
far from congruent since much of current Government activity would fall outside its legitimate or
obligatory responsibilities. This may call for large scale dismantling of the existing apparatus, a
goal worth striving for however difficult it may be. However, if the underlying logic of limiting
its role to the essentials is wholeheartedly accepted and endorsed, a road map for the future can
be charted out.

In the light of the constitutional mandate, the political, social and economic circumstances of the
Country and the State and the development goals of alleviation of poverty and raising the
standards of living of the people, the above mentioned minimalist view of the role of the State
cannot be accepted in this country and the State for a long time to come at the least. What has
progressively come to be accepted more or less unanimously is the curtailing of the role of the
State in the field of manufacturing and commerce through privatization of purely commercial
public enterprises without any social purpose, primarily the loss making ones. Total
privatization of essential services like water supply and electricity also are not in the realms of
possibility and prudence. It is also against equity. The following quote from the Report of the
11th Finance Commission would be relevant in this context. Expenditure restructuring would
call for a rethinking on the role of Governments itself. In general, Governments may have to
withdraw from a number of areas and strengthen their role in selected sectors in the overall
context of economic reforms. Goods and services may be defined over a wide range from pure
public goods at one extreme to pure private goods at the other. In the intermediate space, there
may be goods that are basically private in nature but with different degrees of externality.
Whereas public goods have to be provided by Governments, in the remaining sectors the
Government sector should have a limited role. Even in the context of public goods, a distinction
may be made between private production of public goods financed by public authorities, as
compared to public production of public goods. In other words, supply and production need to
be distinguished. Where the public authority is responsible for supply, it need not necessarily get
into the act of production. Government needs to enter only in those areas where due to large
externalities, private sector participation, by itself, would lead to sub-optimal supply. This
recommendation is worthy of acceptance and progressive adoption.

Outsourcing

A second initiative which is being increasingly resorted to, in order to reduce cost and
recruitment of non essential staff, is to outsource certain support functions like security, house
keeping, maintenance of computer network and provision of software etc. Beyond this there is
not much scope for the time being in the reduction of role of Government which would impact
on the size of the secretariat.

73
Reducing Size of Civil Service

A major plank of structural adjustment which has met with serious opposition, and which has not
really succeeded in its objective is the reduction of the cost of establishment by trimming of staff
including retirement of personnel considered surplus or opting for voluntary retirement. The
tendency in the public sector is as it has been observed elsewhere also to slowly accumulate fat
again in course of time nullifying the original conscious cut. Further in the process of voluntary
retirement it is the enterprising and better quality personnel who are likely to opt out leaving the
old and the junk which Government wishes to get rid of. It may be recalled in this context that
the Gangopadhyay Committee which examined the question of trimming staff strength has not
being acted upon. What could be achieved less painfully and more practicably is to implement
the recommendation of the Fifth Pay Commission of the Central Government to freeze
recruitment in the future and to abolish existing vacancies in an establishment and to make
selective recruitment, after careful consideration, to meet the essential goals of poverty
alleviation, literacy, health and other essential services. Going by the international standards, the
size of the public service in the State cannot be said to be excessive. Rather it is widespread
indiscipline evidenced by chronic late attendance, ghost employees and unauthorized absence
even in most essential social service areas of education and health and extremely poor work
culture that require to be handled on priority and with a firm hand by a determined political
leadership. A United Nations document recommends emphasis to be placed on probity in
dealing with public funds, a service orientation in delivery, the enforcement of law against
bribery and other corrupt practices, financial reform and political appointments and electoral
campaigns and the development and implementation of generally accepted code of ethics,
professionalisms and civil service autonomy. Improving productivity of public servants
through more effective and accountable management of existing personnel is a positive way of
utilization of manpower in the public sector which is hardly attempted systematically even now.

Corporatization

Corporatization of Government functions by converting civil service departments into free

standing corporations or authorities within the civil service or outside it altogether has been one
of the major planks of reform of the public sector and public services management in advanced
countries. Andhra Pradesh had begun this process of corporatization of development and welfare
function as a conscious policy as early as in the 1960s when institutions for industrial promotion
were established progressively followed by extension of this concept to welfare and social
sectors with the result that there are today innumerable statutory authorities, corporations,
cooperatives, societies etc. This process continues even today even as an earlier generation of
state owned enterprises is being put on the auctioneers block (Charles Polidano). These have
turned out to be simply a tool of convenience intended to free the particular Government
function hitherto within the control of Government and the civil service from the constraints of
civil service red tape. Unlike in the case of advanced countries, this experiment here has become
less of a means of improving efficiency than a defensive measure aimed at maintaining basic
operational viability. Freedom from the rigid civil services pay structure, detailed rules and
procedures relating to civil service conduct, adoption of the private sector scientific management
elements of performance based accountability and performance oriented staff appraisal and

74
linking of appraisals to career rewards and sanctions could not, for reasons which are obvious
now, be realized while adopting this process of corporatization. All these continue to be treated
as the State under Article 12 of the Constitution with all its attendant obligations. The efforts to
permanently dislink the umbilical chord between the Government and the erstwhile public
servants of these corporations have not succeeded to the extent envisaged even today and it has
also not been possible to really achieve the intended performance accountability and hence this
experiment has simply become a means of reducing civil service red tape.

The best known examples of such New Public Management reform are the UK and New Zealand
where it was sought to achieve greater efficiency, cost effectiveness and performance by way of
substantially improving service quality and public image through the mechanisms of setting
performance targets and providing requisite functional autonomy. The UK, New Zealand etc
have gone to the extreme extend of decentralizing civil service management to the point of
having second thoughts about the same and given considerable autonomy in respect of civil
service management to the heads of departments dismantling the century old Northcote-
Trevelyan structure of civil service and introducing simultaneously the concept of accountability
for outcome and performance rather than being answerable for procedural compliance and the
utilization of inputs, while civil service reforms to this extent is uncalled for, impracticable and
undesirable in India where greater centralized management of the civil service continues to be
essential compared to these advanced countries, at the present juncture, it is essential to delegate
effective control over the staff to the heads of departments and the administrative departments, if
the heads of departments are accountable for performance there should be given sufficient
control of the instruments with which they are required to perform their tasks.

But the Government has not consciously attempted to modernize and reform the scheme of
delegation of administrative, civil service and financial powers and functions and substantially
modify the procedures so as to secure greater economy, efficiency and effectiveness of
implementation in order to improve service delivery and enhance responsiveness and
accountability of the public service to the citizen. We have thus a paradoxical situation of field
departments operating under severe constraints on the one hand and other public bodies enjoying
greater financial and administrative operational freedom to breeding mismanagement on the
other. What is required in the present context is to undertake an effective process of further
administrative, budgetary, financial and civil service delegations to the heads of departments and
in their turn to the field functionaries down to the district level. The need exists not merely for
further formal delegation of powers but also doing away with informal controls being exercised
by the secretariat even in respect of matters wholly falling within purview of heads of
departments, as has already been mentioned earlier in exercise of the powers of interest
arbitration, supervision of implementation function and grievance redressal.

Devolution of Powers, Functions, Finances and Functionaries

The local self governing institutions are in effect the third tier of Government extending from the
district to the village level comprising both rural and urban local bodies. But there is marked
reluctance on the part of State Governments to transfer real control and authority in respect of
subjects in the local bodies lists to them and to make local self Government institutions really
effective instruments of socio economic development apart from provision of basic services in

75
the State as contemplated in the Constitution. Andhra Pradesh is yet to facilitate constitution of
district planning committee to consolidate the plan prepared by the Panchayats and the
Municipalities in the district and to prepare a draft development plan for each district as a whole.
Untied funds for local bodies, need based district plans and effective insulation of local
leadership from State Legislators and State Executives are other imperatives for effective
functioning of local bodies in the State. Government have to enact legislation to give full effect
to the above constitutional provisions and to establish rural and urban local self governing
institutions with their own functions, finances and functionaries; and set up district and
metropolitan planning committees with responsibility for planning from below and integrating
the local bodies plans, the state plan schemes implemented through local bodies within the
district and the centrally sponsored schemes implemented at the district level so as to make them
truly self governing institutions.

Each State is required to constitute a local bodys finance commission to review the financial
position of the local bodies and to make recommendations on the sharing of State Tax Revenues
and assignment taxes, duties, tolls and fees to Panchayats and for sanction of grant-in-aid. In this
context the Central Government appears to have proposed that 40% of the plan schemes shall be
transferred to the district level. Acceptance of the recommendations of the commission as a
matter of course from time to time and suggestion of the Central Government to devolve 40% of
the State plan funds to them against the background of the statute will make the district local
bodies vibrant organizations at the district level, meeting the aspirations of and accountable to
the people. Such a measure in its true spirit will alter the structure of governance and
correspondingly reduce the role and functions of the State Government both in the secretariat and
of the field officers right down to the village level. To facilitate this what is required at the State
level and in the Panchayat Raj Secretariat is to cut back on the rowing function in relation to
local bodies and to strengthen steering and oversight capacity of Panchayat Raj and Municipal
Administration Department. This would, among others also call for an independent Local
Bodies Audit Authority in place of the local fund audit department now under the control of the
Finance department. There would also be necessity for a Local Bodies Vigilance Commission
on the lines of the local bodies Lokayuktha as has already been done by Kerala. In addition, the
relevant State and Subordinate Services Service Rules would need to be amended to create
independent local bodies services with appropriate arrangements for independent recruitment to
such services. There would also be need for constitution of a specialist service comprising senior
officers who could move between senior positions in the urban and rural local bodies and the
State Government departments on the lines of Indian Administrative Service Officers recruited
by the Centre serving in the States with obligation to serve at the Centre to facilitate sharing of
experience and expertise between the State and the local authorities.

Delegation of Powers and Functions

In the Cabinet system of Government all powers vest in the Council of Ministers and the
ministers comprising the Council is collectively responsible for all its actions. By definition the
Council of Ministers includes a committee of the council and has the power to act on its behalf.
The scheme of distribution of business between the Council of Ministers and the Ministers
constituting the Council and also the powers of the Chief Minister including his overriding
powers are specified in the Andhra Pradesh Government Business Rules and Secretariat

76
Instructions issued under Clauses 2 and 3 of Article 166 of the Constitution. The classes of cases
which shall be brought up for consideration of the Cabinet are specified in the rules.

By Cabinet

An exception to this rule has been provided that cases considered by the State Level
Coordination Committee dealing with Agriculture and Irrigation presided by the Chief Minister
need not be brought before it. Decisions of the State Investment Promotion Board and the State
Tourism Promotion Board require only ratification of the Council if the decision is required to be
taken by it. It is possible to identify similar classes of cases on the basis of a careful
consideration of subjects which could be delegated to such boards. Unlike at the Centre, there
are no standing committees of Cabinet for specified sectors empowered to act on its own and
examine major proposals before its consideration by the Council. Presently, group of ministers
are appointed from time to time for consideration of specific issues and to make
recommendations to the council for its decision. Standing Cabinet committees for specific
sectors is a proposition well worth considering for detailed preliminary examination of major
proposals pertaining to the sector concerned and to make its recommendations to the Council of
Ministers. Such long standing committees for specified sectors would gain experience and
expertise in handling complex issues by virtue of such an arrangement. These committees could
also seek expert policy advice from outside. These committees could be delegated specified
powers in respect of subjects which are required to go before the Cabinet in order to speed up
transaction of business, reduce the work load of the Council of Ministers and increase the time at
its disposal for consideration of strategic policy issues and monitor and evaluate the
implementation of policy decisions, laws enacted, schemes under implementation, so as to
increase speed and effectiveness of implementation.

By Political Executive

The minister in charge of a department is made responsible for disposal of business allotted to
that department subject to collective responsibility, requirement of horizontal coordination and
consultation where cross cutting issues involving departments in the same sector, other
departments and the coordinating departments of Finance, Planning, Law and General
Administrative (Services) etc departments as specified in the Rules. More particularly such
consultation is required as has already been indicated with (a) the General Administration
Services Department in regard to matters involving general policy relating to services, framing of
Rules and amendments to service rules, relaxation of rules and the like; (b) the Public
Enterprises Department on all matters relating to general policy release of funds and in matters
where general guidelines have been issued by the public enterprises department and matters
specified in Item 23 of the second schedule requiring approval of Cabinet; (c) the Finance
Department in all matters specified in Rules 11 and 37 to 40. (d) the Planning Department in
respect of plan schemes and (e) the Law Department in matters specified in Rules 41 to 56.

The power of the minister is circumscribed further by the provisions that the classes of cases
specified in the Rules require the approval of the Chief Minister and submission to the Governor
before issue of orders. A large number of cases are now specified which require such approval
of Chief Minister. This list is also in need of comprehensive review so as to increase the speed

77
of disposal and reduce the work load of the Chief Minister so as to allow him time to concentrate
on strategic policy issues, higher level decisions and pressing problems facing the State.

Rule 22 of the Rules underlying the principle of de-concentration and delegation of powers to the
lower levels of hierarchy in the department is universally disregarded by successive ministers.
Except where the Rules or instructions of Government have specifically invested any power on
the secretary, all the powers vesting in the department have to be exercised by the minister. This
means virtually everything which requires decisions goes to him, making a mockery of the
underlying principles. It is a common joke in the secretariat that some ministers would prefer to
delegate policy to the secretary and keep postings and promotions with them. What is sought to
be emphasized is the universal tendency to micro manage everything from the top. In the words
of Prof G Ram Reddy and Dr G Haragopal the causes for the distortions in the working of the
secretariat are largely traced to the changing perceptions of the political executive of their role.
It is observed that the political executive has come to evince greater interest in matters other than
policy formulation.

Even as early as in the year 1964, the Ramachandra Reddy Committee chaired by the then
Minister Revenue found that 40% of the time of the secretariat is spent on routine matters.
Echoing this Prof G Ram Reddy and Dr G Haragopal found in 1983 upon an analysis of 6000
G.Os issued by Government that the policy question dealt by the secretariat is less than 10%, that
about 50% of the decisions were executive in nature and that one third of them are related to
service matters of employees and concluded this indicates that secretariat today is engrossed in
dealing with routine matters which include service matters or operational aspects of the schemes
and programmes. This also indicates how secretariat got entrenched into the jurisdiction that
legitimately belongs to the heads of departments. Other unhealthy trends noticed by them were
the increasing reliance on and clerical domination of the decision making process coupled with a
strong tendency on the part of the heads of departments and the officers in the secretariat to
avoid responsibility and push papers up the line right up to the top.

The tendency for micro management extends not merely to matters falling within the purview of
the Government, but also powers legally vesting in or delegated to the field agencies giving a go
by to the acknowledged principle of separation of policy and implementation and the
deregulation of line management. Legal provisions and executive orders are often simply
disregarded. One is tempted to borrow the words of Allen Schick and point out the existence of
a sharp dichotomy between formal and informal rules of the game in developing countries, and
the predominance of the informal realm. Further the rules of behavior that people actually
follow can be very different from those that are written down. In the words of Prof G Ram
Reddy and Dr Haragopal this phenomenon of centralization of power in the secretariat (has)
reached a point where the heads of departments made to depend helplessly on the whims and
fancies of the secretariat organizations and of the functionaries who man this organization.
Further in the words of Charles Polidano the problem is, rather, that for those who want to get
around the rules for the wrong reasons are able to do so somehow, while well intentioned
managers can find themselves bound hand and foot by centralized red tape. Developing
countries incur all the disadvantages of central control, while seemingly gaining few of the
advantages. This formal informal dichotomy affects both traditional procedural accountability as
also performance based contractual mechanisms of NPM.

78
In order to make the secretariat efficient, first of all this tendency to micro manage things that
could be dealt with at lower levels more fruitfully and, but also to usurp the legitimate role of
field agencies have to be put an end to. What the Secretary of the department has to do, upon
assumption of office by a minister, is to place before the minister concerned, a copy of the
standing orders in force with a suggested scheme of delegation and seek orders of the new
minister thereon. It would not be surprising if one finds that there is no such standing order in
any department. In the larger interest of the Government it should be made mandatory for all
secretaries to prepare and present a tentative scheme of delegation outlining powers that may
vest with the minister, and the powers that may be delegated to the different levels in the
department viz., the secretary, the deputy secretary etc. and for the minister to approve such a list
invariably so as to bring into force a well conceived scheme of delegation of powers and
functions at different levels within the department. Such a proposal would have to be a well
thought out list outlining all day to day issues coming up for decision before the minister, the
guiding principle for preparation being that all issues of policy would have to be submitted to the
minister. There could be standing arrangement to call for orders issued under Rule 22 and
review the same by the Chief Minister within a month of assumption of office of new ministers
for which the Chief Secretary has to take the initiative.

Petition Handling

Being representative of the people a minister has naturally to accept petitions in respect of
matters totally falling solely within the purview of the field agencies, the dilemma of the manner
in which such petitions are to be disposed of was resolved by making a provision in Rule 23
which stipulated that representations, petitions and applications received by a minister required
to be disposed of at the level of the head of the department or below shall be classified and sent
by the ministers office directly to the head of the department or field officer for appropriate
disposal and report on the action taken to the ministers office making it thereby clear that these
papers shall not be sent to or dealt within the secretariat and that the endorsements of the
minister on the petition are not orders of Government. The Rule further prohibits entertainment
of such representations in the secretariat.

A Grievance Redressal Cell was established in the General Administration Department to deal
with representations received by the Chief Minister, the progress of disposal of which is required
to be monitored electronically in the department based on the software developed by the Centre
for Good Governance. Accepting the fundamental principle that such representations accepted
by the Chief Minister and Ministers shall not be dealt with in the secretariat except where it
involves revision of policy or decision in Government, there is need to evolve an enlarged,
streamlined and computerized grievance redressal monitoring mechanism in the secretariat as a
whole and in each secretariat department linked in turn to all its field agencies down to the
village to handle such representations, which should eventually be capable of being accessed by
representationists to know the progress in respect of petitions and the level at which the matter is
pending and to bring delay to the notice of the concerned superior authority above the authority
which is expected to dispose of the petition. It is heartening to know that in the Ranga Reddy
District, the Collector has initiated recently such a computerized grievance handling procedure

79
linked to the RajIV kiosks through public private partnership. Such a system is functioning in
the Mumbai city which is managed by a civil society group on behalf of the corporation.

By Coordinating Departments

Where as consultation with other departments are stipulated in respect of overlapping issues
likely to concern or affect such departments, concurrence or approval is required in respect of
specified matters involving personnel, legal and financial implications whereby the department
concerned is obliged to refer to all or any of the coordinating departments for such concurrence
viz., the General Administration Services Department, the Law and Legislative Affairs
Department and the Finance Department. Most of the matters required to be dealt with in the
department do require consultation most of the time with such coordinating departments. Having
regard to the number of levels through which a file is now passing through in a department one
can imagine a decision requiring consultation with all the three coordinating departments. The
study team of Prof G Ram Reddy and Dr G Haragopal came to the conclusion based on case
studies, that the maximum number of departments a case passes through is five and the
minimum two; on an average each case has to pass through three departments. With regard to
the number of sections, the maximum number of sections involved is eight and the minimum
two; the average worked out to four to five sections; in respect of number of levels that a case
passes through the maximum is fifteen and minimum five. On an average the number of levels
involved in disposing the case is eleven.

Obviously there is no exaggeration in the finding of M R Pai and G Ram Reddy in 1964 that the
time taken for disposal of a case ranged between a maximum of 1010 days and a minimum of 19
days with an average of 211 days. By 1983 this had increased according to Prof G Ram Reddy
and Dr G Haragopal on the basis of their case studies to a maximum of 3100 days and a
minimum of 67 days with an average of 733 days. Even though these studies are decades old the
situation doesnt seem to have improved to any appreciable extent, the well intentioned clean and
green programme, the joke goes in the secretariat was used to get rid of unwanted files and
papers rather than making the office prim, tidy and proper. Such consultation process on file,
except in cases of extreme urgency where the matter is handled at the level of secretary has apart
from causing excessive delay, become a convenient excuse and a dilatory practice intentionally
misused by the departmental functionaries simply to avoid responsibility for decision making.
Even totally unnecessary matters in which there is no need or obligation to consult other
departments where the power to decide the issue vests in the department itself are so referred for
concurrence, advise, opinion, or simply for perusal. This practice extends not merely to cases of
interdepartmental reference but also to cases involving consultation with outside bodies like the
Andhra Pradesh Vigilance Commission and the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission.
These tendencies have to be effectively curtailed and methods should be found to do so.

This is indicative of the structural complications arising as a result of consultations intended for
achieving horizontal coordination in the decision making process. Rather than having segregated
handling of issues in isolation without examination of all aspects financial, functional, personnel
and legal, as is happening at present, what is required is integrated handling, in a holistic way
with full knowledge and responsibility in every department. To do this what is required is to
simplify and streamline institutional mechanisms and processes of delegation to heads of

80
departments of appropriate powers, de-concentration within the secretariat and devolution of
powers to the local self governing institutions in accordance with the constitutional scheme as
already elaborated in order to empower them and to reduce the need for reference of too many
cases to the secretariat for decision. These have to be ably supplemented by effective
rationalization of the process of file handling and movement in the secretariat in order to speed
up the process of decision making.

An institutional mechanism that has been widely recommended and already being implemented
at the Centre in respect of financial matters, is the institution of integrated internal financial
advisers in individual departments reporting to the respective secretaries to Government under
the overall supervision, control and guidance of the concerned coordinating department which
the internal adviser represents, any reference to the coordinating department concerned being
responsibility of the internal adviser in accordance with the powers conferred on the internal
adviser. Already there is a separate full fledged department which acts as financial adviser,
though not internal, to engineering departments viz., the Finance Projects Wing Department. As
a precursor to such a possible scheme in respect of Law Department, there is an order of the
Government (GOMs No 508, GA (AR&T.I) Department dated 3.12.1999 by which it has been
ordered that there shall be a legal cell in major departments consisting of an officer of district
judge rank who would advise the department on legal issues / court matters. The same order
stipulates that a desk officer with the rank of assistant secretary shall be responsible for legal
work of the department in respect of subjects assigned to him. But it would appear that this
order like many other orders of the Government relating to streamlining movement of files and
official levels of handling files also remains in name only. While an officer of the rank of a
district judge is unnecessary to function as the internal legal adviser of the department, the
principle underlining this order of the need for a legal adviser in each department, as is the
imperative to have an internal financial adviser, is unassailable and is a decision which
Government should take and implement at the earliest. It is strange that the senior most officers
manning the secretariat departments are not being trusted and entrusted with powers; but the
same Government is willing to constitute hundreds of free standing corporations societies and
other entities with all financial, administrative, legal and personnel powers without taking care or
ensuring that systems and requisite control mechanisms to facilitate economical, effective and
ethical management are in place. It is suggested that each department should have an internal
financial adviser who should be under the overall supervision and guidance of an integrated
Finance and Planning Department, and an internal legal adviser reporting to the secretary
concerned vested with power to initiate his annual confidential role. It is true that there are far
too many small departments the workload in which would not necessitate or justify a separate
internal adviser. It has been recommended elsewhere that line departments which belong to a
sector be placed in charge of a coordinating Special Chief Secretary or Principal Secretary. In
departments which do not justify a separate officer, an internal adviser may be kept in charge of
a sector comprising such small departments kept under the Special Chief Secretary or Principal
Secretary to start with. This would keep the number of internal financial advisers and internal
legal advisers within manageable limits. In so far as personnel matters are concerned it should
be a rule that consultation with General Administration Services Department should be limited to
issues of policy only obviating the need for reference of routine cases to it. A point worthy of
note is the fact that there are personnel matters having financial implications which will get
referred to in any case the internal financial adviser who could take care of the service angle

81
involved in the issue also. Such an arrangement would substantially cut out the need for
references to the coordinating departments. It may be noted in this context that as early as
possible in the year 1964, M R Pai and G Ram Reddy recommended appointment of internal
financial advisers under the secretary of the administrative department responsible for all
financial transactions in the department.

Mere appointment of internal financial advisers without transferring the powers of the finance
department to him, to the extent feasible, will be no solution and may only lead to rerouting the
file through the financial adviser to the finance department. The intention is to cut out reference
to Finance Department except where it is absolutely unavoidable. While appointing the financial
adviser (as also the legal adviser), care should be taken to ensure, right from the start, that the
clerical system is not duplicated here and that the officer oriented system should be introduced
right from the beginning avoiding appointment of full fledged sections under him duplicating the
process. He should only have an executive assistant and desk officers depending on the need.

Finance department exercises three types of control viz.,

1) Budgetary sanctions;
2) Financial powers and expenditure control; and
3) Treasury control involving regulation of cash flow

The general attitude of an officer of the Finance Department towards a proposal from a
department would normally be to take a totally unhelpful attitude of successively denying,
deferring, delaying and finally if it cannot be helped, diluting the same. Requisite powers, over
and above what is capable of being delegated, which could be so delegated under each of these
heads should be transferred and de-concentrated to the FA under the overall supervision and
control of the finance secretary. Ramachandra Reddy Committee which examined financial
delegations pointed out that under Rule 11 every proposal not covered by a general delegation
made by the finance department having a direct or indirect bearing on finances has to be referred
to the finance department; that the powers delegated from time to time are limited and advised
that as long as the overall provision in the budget was not exceeded there should be no need for
any reference to the finance department. M R Pai and G Ram Reddy also had examined these
issues in detail and in addition to the appointment of financial advisers had recommended
rigorous pre budget scrutiny of departmental budgets in order to provide the department
maximum freedom to operate the budget authorized after passing of the budget and availability
of full year for implementing the scheme. The same recommendation was subsequently made by
Prof G Ram Reddy and Dr G Haragopal in 1983 also.

This recommendation continues to remain on paper, even though there has been a series of
financial delegations on various occasions as is the fate of many other worthwhile proposals.
The appointment of financial advisers should be preceded / accompanied by complementary
measures of further financial delegations to heads of departments and their field agencies so as to
avoid references, as far as possible to the secretariat in the course of implementation of schemes
once sanction is accorded and budget release is authorized in proportion to their responsibilities
and levels. In addition, it should be possible for finance department to permit more powers of
reappropriation to the secretariat and the heads of departments. Avoiding multiple references to
both finance and planning departments should also be possible. In addition to sanction of

82
scheme, issue of G.O. and budget approval departments have to wait for release of funds by the
finance department. Timely budget authorization and release of funds at regular intervals would
also help departments implement the programme in time, avoid March rush and unauthorized
transfer of funds from Government accounts to corporate accounts and personal deposit accounts
with all its attendant problems.

In order to enhance financial management including tax administration and personnel

management, the following approaches have been advised by the UN in a paper on Reforms,
which are worthy of consideration by the Government :

1. Introduction of performance budgets and performance targets;

2. Use of budget ceilings;
3. Empowering programme managers financially within budgetary limits so that they can be
held accountable for achieving results;
4. Dividing budget and finance responsibilities by giving the finance ministry and treasury
only macro controls in resource mobilization and public expenditure, and giving the line
ministries and agencies greater flexibility in managing their allocations; and
5. Restructuring personnel management in a similar fashion.

By Subject Departments

Today except matters of day to day administration pertaining to the staff attached to a
department, many matters connected with public services management are referred to the
administrative department concerned or are summoned by the department to the secretariat. In
turn consultation with the General Administration Services Department as a procedural
requirement or simply as a safeguard for information is being made, the matter being
complicated further if it involves finance in which event it is referred to the finance department
also. Consultation in respect of issues involving major principles or implication or policy are
required to be referred to them. The line function of implementation primarily vests in the field
agencies headed by the heads of departments, the political executive and the permanent civil
service in the secretariat performing the staff function of assisting the political executive in the
task retaining the functions of monitoring and evaluation of implementation. Contrary to the
well established principle, there is excessive formal and informal concentration of administrative
power in the hands of the departments of the secretariat.

According to Prof G Ram Reddy and Dr G Haragopal Report that over the years the
differentiation in the roles have got so much blurred that even small and routine matters have
come to engage the attention of the secretariat. ----------- The tendency for centralization of
power has been strong in spite of universal emphasis on the need for decentralization This apart
according to them the general disposition to avoid decision making and its consequences by the
heads of departments contributed to the decision making in the secretariat. The phenomenon of
centralization of power in the secretariat reached a point where the heads of departments are
made to depend helplessly on the whims and fancies of the secretariat organization and of
functionaries who man this organization. The tendency to concentrate power is not confined to
the secretariat. It is equally to be found among the heads of departments and officers at the lower
levels. A single example of this tendency can be illustrated by the decision of Government to

83
keep in abeyance orders already issued by Government, in the wake of localization of cadres
under the Presidential Order in the 1980s immediately upon issue, to delegate the powers of
cadre control involving appointment and all other conditions of service of Government servants
up to and including the second gazetted category in order to provide effective control of
personnel to the heads of departments and their lower subordinates. It was not brought into force
for long. Further it remains to be seen whether this has been really done even today by
amendment of the respective rules and further whether correspondingly powers have been
delegated in respect of cadre control to the lower subordinates to the extent required to ensure
effective supervision, control and accountability. The matters do not stop here. Powers continue
to be exercised from the top even to transfer very low level functionaries in the field. In fact
there is a sharp difference between the formal and informal rules of the game. Even where there
are formal delegations because of the predominance of the informal controls, the rules of
behavior of those in power are different from those that are formally written down. The misuse
of the powers of transfer, the political interference in transfers and their frequency have become
serious enough to warrant a formal and effective legislation for regulation of transfers as have
already done by the Governments of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. To put it in a nut shell,
devolution of powers consistent with the statutory requirements to the local authorities and
decentralization of powers of Government to heads of departments and de-concentration of
powers within different levels in each department are urgent initiatives.

In passing it should also be mentioned here that not only that the heads of departments are not
entrusted with powers consistent with the requirements of performance of their responsibilities,
adequate weight is also not given to the advise given to them in regard to technical inputs of
policy and operational issues of implementation. Even the manner of handling proposals
received from the heads of departments in the secretariat needs to be reformed in keeping with
the status, role and functions of the heads of departments and chief executives of public
corporations and authorities.

De-concentration within Departments

De-concentration of powers vesting in the minister in charge of a department as envisaged in

Rule 22 of the Business Rules to the secretary to Government of the department and the deputy
secretary and assistant secretary are also essential in order to provide the secretary and the
minister in charge enough time to concentrate on major issues of policy and implementation.
Issue of standing orders as contemplated under Rule 22 delegating powers should be made
mandatory on the basis of guidelines that may be set based on the orders of Chief Minister to
ensure effective delegation. Secondly, as contemplated in Rule 23, petitions handling in the
secretariat should be totally dispensed with except to the extent of ensuring that the grievance
redressal is timely and effective for which it is essential to have a computerized grievance
redressal mechanism which could be capable of being accessed by the petitioner to ascertain the
stage of matter to identify the officer responsible for the delay and enabling the matter being
brought to the notice of the officer at the supervisory level. Citizens charter, time limits for
meeting the obligations and mechanism of payment of compensation to the citizen in the event of
delay and penalty on the person responsible for delay should be integrated with the grievance
redressal mechanism. Thirdly, the long standing rule relating to the deputy secretary being
treated as almost on par with secretary to Government in the mater of circulation of files which

84
was revoked and which has now been revived should be really effectively implemented, the
secretary being required to see these files on return from circulation and to interrupt order if any
contrary to policy, law or precedent.

Thus the multiple initiatives of decentralization of powers on the part of the coordinating
departments of Law, GAD and Finance to the administrative department and in their turn to the
heads of departments together with the institution of the mechanism of internal financial advisers
and legal advisers in the sectoral line departments, decentralization of powers of department to
the heads of departments, and the de-concentration of powers vesting in the secretariat
departments and the heads of departments would make the secretariat a more manageable and
efficient organization capable of more effective implementation of policy and greater capacity
for policy formulation and coordination. The size and structure of the secretariat would also get
modified to the extent of devolution of powers contemplated by virtue of 73rd and 74th
amendments to the Constitution.

Flattening Levels

Another structural deficiency is presented by the manner in which the secretariat sections are
constituted determining the levels through which a matter passes up the ladder in the course of
consideration of a matter arising within the secretariat or received in the secretariat from the
heads of departments or the chief executives of public enterprises. The lowest level where a
paper starts its journey in the secretariat is at the level of the assistant section officer of the
section. Ordinarily every paper begins its journey from him and goes to the section officer of the
section, the assistant secretary, the deputy secretary, the secretary and ends with the minister if
there is no delegation under Rule 22 and if the matter is exclusively within the purview of the
department without any implication on Finance, Law, GAD, Planning, Public Enterprise, or
other sister departments. Most of the time all these levels are duplicated (except perhaps the
level of the ministers in the advisory departments) in every department to which a file is referred.
Thus the climb of a secretariat file up the ladder and down the steps back to the section which is
duplicated in other departments as well is a long and arduous journey if the matter is important
there may be additional levels of the Chief Secretary, the Minister Finance and the other
ministers concerned and the Chief Minister right up to the Cabinet. A clarification or a query at
any stage will force the retracing of the steps back to the originating department and the assistant
section officer for the journey to commence again with the clarification and queries are raised at
the drop of a hat. This explains the enormous delay referred to in the two studies earlier. Even a
file received from the head of the department, starts its journey in the secretariat in the section,
whereas applying the principle of equivalency it ought to be initiated by the deputy secretary or
the assistant secretary. The short point is the need for flattening the secretariat structure and
reducing the number of levels as has been recommended by a number of committees earlier there
should be not more than two levels of consideration of any important file. The level in respect of
consideration and decision of unimportant matters or routine matters should be similarly brought
down to relieve the higher levels of routine burden and to provide enough time for consideration
of issues involving coordination and decisions.

Repeated attempts to flatten the levels in the secretariat and to drastically modify the process of
file management within the sections have not succeeded in making any dent what so ever so far.

85
Level jumping, desk officer system and single file system were reforms introduced in this
direction but has been of no avail so far just as in spite of statutory requirement of making
Telugu the official language for transaction of business of Government has remained on paper in
the secretariat. Level jumping was conceived of as an easy way of reducing the number of levels
of consideration of a paper without altering the secretariat structure. If a paper was initiative at
the level of a section officer, it could skip the assistant secretarys level and go to the deputy
secretary and the secretary. Where it was examined at the Asst. Secs level it skipped the level of
deputy secretary. The desk officer system envisages that only the designated desk officer, who
could be of the rank of even a deputy secretary, could initiate specified papers. In both the
systems there was no intension to tamper with the section structure which remained intact. But
the excessive reliance of the senior officers on the section has negated all these attempts with all
the deleterious effects which have been dealt with in detail earlier. These two reforms have now
to be enforced from above requiring the secretaries to do so within a reasonably short time limit
without fail. The purpose of these initiatives is to reduce the number of levels of consideration
of a file. It shall be made mandatory that there are not more than two levels of consideration of a
file under any circumstance.

Instructions exist to have a single file system between the head of the department and the
secretariat so as to avoid formal correspondence between the head of the department and the
secretariat and repeated exchange of letters for clarifications etc and as a result to speed up the
process of decision making in respect of implementation issues requiring approval of
Government. This measure also has been given a go by as in the case of desk officer system and
level jumping. The advantage of this system is that on receipt of a file from the head of
department with all the material papers and correspondence which the head of the department
has carried out preparatory to the submission of proposal to the secretariat can be straight away
processed at the level of the deputy secretary or at least the assistant secretary without being sent
down to the section to enable a decision on the department file itself avoiding the entire process
of duplication of the same file in the secretariat. This also enables the head of the department to
understand the reasoning based on which his proposal has been negatived or modified so that he
could if need be come up again to the Government for a review. Alternatively it enables the
Government to consult the head of the department informally before a decision is taken. As a
matter of fact, in keeping with the status, knowledge and technical expertise of the head of the
department the Secretariat Instructions require that a head of the department shall have the right
of being heard if it is proposed to modify or negative his proposal. This salutary principle is also
not being adhered by the secretariat while often appropriating his powers to themselves.

Officer Oriented Administration

Technology has brought fundamental changes to the manner in which paper work is carried on in
offices. In place of manuscript, stenography and typing today one is expected to use a computer
dispensing with the need for typists, clerks and stenographers. What an officer needs today is an
office assistant to maintain the office records. Similar is the case with roneo operators and
attenders who have also become totally dispensable. With universal acceptance of electronic file
handling physical carrying of files could be a thing of the past. The secretariat staff structure has
to be modified and modernized in the light of these initiatives of desk officer and level jumping,
and to keep pace with technology progressively starting straightaway dispensing with the

86
recruitment of roneo operators, typists cum assistants and lower division stenographers to be
followed by letting assistant section officers posts die down by afflux of time by giving up
recruitment of any kind to this category in posts falling vacant arising in course of time, paving
the way for introduction of a real officer oriented system with section officers as the lowest level
virtually. Till this objective is earnestly achieved for which a time limit has to be set, level
jumping coupled with selective desk officer system should be enforced universally in all
secretariat sections straightaway without any further dithering, vacillation or allowing any
intentional go slow and systematically preventing ghost writing for desk officers by the assistant
section officers. Simultaneously initiation of file by an assistant section officer should be
prohibited. Having regard to the decades old bitter experience of failed attempts to flatten the
structure, this is the only way the purpose can be achieved in reality.

Shared Services

The following is a list of central units undertaking secretarial support functions for and on behalf
of all the departments of secretariat by the General Administration Department, Finance,
Planning and IT&C Departments :

1. Secretariat Reception
2. Public Assistance and Grievances Bureau
3. Secretariat Security, Watch and Ward and Conservancy
4. Central Record Branch where records containing matter which has been disposed of
intended to be preserved for varying periods are temporarily lodged within the secretariat
premises for easy access when needed.
5. Interim repository of records managed by the State archives on behalf of the secretariat
which subsequently become archival material transferred to the State Archives
6. Secretariat Library
7. Central Cash Section under Finance Department
8. Office of the Pay and Accounts Officer under Finance Department
9. Central Single Unit in charge of Secretariat Service Cadres
10. A P Technology Services Unit under Planning Department
11. Telephone Exchange and Police Wireless Communication Link
12. National Informatic Centre Liaison Office of the N.I.C.
13. Computer Network and SKIMS (Secretariat Knowledge and Information Management
System) under I T & C Department

There are certain other common functions identifiable across the secretariat on the lines of the
above mentioned categories which are now carried on by individual departments to the extent it
concerns them which can be also be grouped and provided as shared services from a single
secretariat unit. House keeping functions like preparation of bills, payment of salaries and
allowances, TA, etc, and procurement of office stationery on behalf of departments are capable
of being computerized and centrally managed. Functions involving specification of uniform
standards and quality, identification and rating of vendors, tender process, pricing, quality
checks, contracts, and payments on behalf of departments could be undertaken on a centralized
basis on behalf of all departments of secretariat to eliminate these repeated processes in all the 31
departments throughout the year based on contracts entered into by the central agency on behalf

87
of all departments. These would relieve departments lot of routine work and leave them free for
doing the substantive work and save Government extra cost etc. Such centralization is also
capable of ensuring real savings by elimination of malpractices and corruption on the part of
departments and the suppliers.

Regulatory Reforms

An initiative allied to modernization of Government and reforms is regulatory reform, a renewed

effort for which was made by the Government of India as part of Action Plan for Effective and
Responsive Government. The initiative included identification of laws which are no longer
needed or relevant which could be repealed straightaway; and laws which require changes or
modifications to bring them in accord with the world trends in the area of governance reforms in
the context of globalization and liberalization processes; and revision of rules, regulations, orders
and notifications. In order to see through this process, the initiative for which was to be
undertaken by the ministries of Government of India, a Law Commission was also appointed, as
a result of which a recommendation was made to repeal 1300 central laws of different categories.
No such initiative seems to have been taken by the State Government to weed out laws and
regulations which have outlived their utility and to modernize the laws, rules and procedures.
This is another area in need of immediate action.

Just as the old secretariat sections are overcrowded and cluttered up with old records and all
kinds of junk, the attics of Government are cluttered with extraordinarily large number of age old
laws, rules and procedures which are no longer relevant or applicable today. A concerted effort
to modernize these laws and administrative regulations, rules and procedures is essential unlike
the Central Government which has been undertaking systematic review of these laws through
Law Commissions, there has been no effort in the last quarter century on the part of the State
Government to weed out sunset laws and administrative rules and outmoded procedures. The
appointment of a Law Commission to review all the state laws and to bring them up to date is a
measure of modernization well worth considering.

Simplification of Procedures

The procedures of Government are in need of modernizing, simplifying, rationalizing and their
eventual automatization wherever feasible in keeping with the requirements of changing times.
A comprehensive review and revision of provisions of the Business Rules and Secretariat
Instructions, which has not been done in recent memory, is the need of the hour in order to
modernize and bring these rules in accord with the vast changes that have taken place in the
principles and practice in public policy and management in the light of international best
practices to make transaction of business more efficient, speedy and coherent. What has been
attempted in the past is only scriptural changes and incorporation of amendments which have
been made to these rules and instructions. Such a revision in particular will focus on strategic
policy capacity and coordination, reexamine cases which require consultations, provide for prior
consultation in crucial issues with policy advisory bodies and the public, cases which need
consideration by the Chief Minster, the Governor and the Council and include feedback,
monitoring and review of Cabinet decisions not merely in the nature of issue of orders in

88
pursuance of decisions as is the present practice; but extending to substantive implementation in
field and the outcome and impact of such implementation.

This process should also simultaneously extend to updating the departmental procedures and
manuals and laws, rules and regulations. The finance department had sometime ago reissued the
codes and manuals of department incorporating the amendments whereas the General
Administration Department reprinted them along with the amendments without incorporation.
Attempt is on to modernize and update the works codes and related documents in respect of
public works incorporating the modern trends in the area of public contracting under the auspices
of the Centre for Good Governance. It is this process that should be undertaken by the Finance
and General Administration Departments in respect of the budget manual, financial codes and
civil service regulations after making substantive amendments, modifications and simplification
and thereby securing modernization of processes and simplification of procedures. It is
envisaged that the budgetary reforms and financial delegations and delegation of cadre
management of public services would be undertaken and the changes so effected would be
incorporated in revised manuals of procedure and published including on the Net for easy access
and reference not only by departmental officers but also by the members of the public.

Concurrently line departments would have to undertake a comprehensive review of their

departmental manuals and codes of procedures relevant to the functions with which they are
concerned on priority. This is particularly important as a prelude to computerization of the
processes of departmental procedures. Otherwise, computerization would have no meaning.
Process re-engineering has to take place first before digitizing the processes. It is recalled that
such a comprehensive effort was made to codify the laws, regulations and orders of Government
including judicial pronouncements and the detailed procedures relating to all aspects of vigilance
was made by publication of four volumes of a comprehensive vigilance manual including putting
the same online for access by all waving the confidential clause hitherto existing in respect of
such matters.

ICT Applications

Information Communication Technologies are powerful process tools. It can provide instant
information at all hours to the citizen and feedback to the Government at the click of a mouse
irrespective of the distance, act as a powerful tool to implement the Right to Information Act,
facilitate convenient transactions between the citizen and the Government and provide seamless
integrated services across departments. It is an effective means of ensuring accountability of the
public servant through management information and performance evaluation systems. In a State
of the size and distances as Andhra Pradesh computerized information kiosks on the lines of
RajIV Internet Village, capable of providing information, documentation, forms etc needed by
villagers far away from the State or district or mandal head quarters will be a great boon and save
a lot of time, effort and money to the common man. Information communication technologies
thus provide powerful networks of high volume communication to individuals and groups, public
or private, transcending organizational, spatial, and jurisdictional boundaries and barriers. The
use of ICTs enable Government citizen interface via systems providing two way electronic
communications and secure service delivery transactions. It also enables back office system
integration by which a customer with multiple needs can be handled at one point of contact that

89
is a virtual one stop shop. They are being progressively deployed in the State to address service
delivery and development and in innovative, citizen friendly and speedy way making use of the
internet, wide area networks and intranets to transform Government transactions with citizens,
with businesses and different organizations of Government. One of the early innovations ie.,
eSeva undertaken by the State Government which has become a model for the country is to
bundle related transactions to the client based on their needs. Andhra Pradesh has made
tremendous progress in the application of ICTs through eSeva, AP Online, CARD, etc systems in
the field and Secretariat Knowledge and Information Management Systems (SKIMS) in the
secretariat.

In order to carry forward the process what is required is to have an integrated long term policy of
modernization of Government information, management and service delivery systems and E-
Government strategy so that what is computerized is not old outmoded citizen unfriendly and
corrupt system with inherent delays, difficulties and duplications. The fundamental point to be
noted in connection with E-Government strategies is that it is primarily and more concerned with
Government and rationalization, simplification and transformation of its processes to facilitate
easy, convenient and efficient interactions between the citizens and the Government than
electronics. To be precise g is more important and comes first than e.

The State needs to adopt an integrated whole of government strategy for e-governance covering
information, communication, interaction and transactions with access to all departments, citizens
and civil society bodies, with integrated shareable databases, best practices and knowledge bank,
computerized back office, management information and performance appraisal systems with
intranet, wide area net and internet access with interactivity facilitating greater transparency,
accountability and integrity of transactions and efficiency, speed and effectiveness of service
delivery. The benefits of such an e-governance structure should be available to even the poor
and in the remote villages with easy access for the public to the Government and the world
outside with one stop shops.

Citizen Facilitation and Infrastructure

The physical infrastructure of the Andhra Pradesh Secretariat is in the process of being
modernized and the old temporary structures are giving place to new, networked, modern office
infrastructure with a better working environment and facilities for the staff. It is hoped that this
process will continue so as to benefit the entire secretariat at the earliest. However a new visitor
having work in the secretariat, who doesnt know how to find his way through the maze of
buildings and departments, doesnt get any worthwhile help when he arrives at the reception
counter. This first point of contact with Government which represents the face of all
Government is likely to put him off badly and give him an impression of a totally unhelpful
environment. A citizen friendly Government has to politely guide a visitor having a grievance or
work as to how to go about his work, guide him or at least show him the way to the proper
building, department and the officer who is connected with his work. As has been done by the
Government of India there should be a number of information desk or facilitation counters if
need be catering to specific departments manned by helpful officers with full information of the
subjects handled and the officers in charge so that such visitors could be properly guided to the

90
right department and the officer. It is worthwhile recalling here that Ontario Government in
Canada has published Government telephone directory as the green pages on the lines of the
commercial yellow pages listing names on the basis of services provided rather than listing under
offices and organizations so as to enable a citizen to identify the office with which the work is
connected without anybodys help or assistance. There are standing instructions to ensure that a
call received on a telephone including one meant for general public access is responded to by the
third ring of the phone. Malaysian Government has introduced a holistic approach to client /
counter services in every office to answer questions from the public to facilitate electronic
queuing with an online real time Government wide computer system and telephone system to
provide information about services directly to citizens coupled with distribution of guide books
about the facilities and location of information centres. The facilitation counter should also have
arrangements to receive representations or communications under proper receipt where the
visitor intends only to deliver the letter or paper. The officer manning the counter should also
have access to the website of the department with which the visitor is concerned. An interesting
recommendation made by the Assam Administrative Reforms Commission in this context is
worth noting where it said that the visitors of the secretariat should be surveyed periodically to
understand the reasons that bring them there their problems, potential solutions, effectiveness of
measures taken by the Government etc, which could in its opinion be credibly done by an
independent non Government organization.

Personnel Policy

On the basis of an interim report of the IPE on restructuring the secretariat presented to the
Government in 2005, the Government issued orders recently creating 36 posts of assistant
secretaries with corresponding reduction of posts of typists cum assistants and rationalized the
cadre structure of the departments sections up to and including the level of assistant secretary
achieving a hierarchical staff ratio of two assistant section officers to a section officer and the
little over three section officers to an assistant secretary. The ratio between the assistant
secretary and the category of deputy secretary and above, but below secretary, as a result of
increase in the number of assistant secretaries, is roughly 1 : 2. Of the 78 posts of deputy, joint
and additional secretaries, 29 are cadre posts earmarked for Indian Administrative Service
Officers, 49 posts being earmarked for secretariat officers recruited and promoted from the
categories of typists cum assistants, stenographers and assistant section officers which brings
promotion opportunities ratio of assistant secretaries to deputy secretaries to 1 : 3. These deputy
secretaries could further go up to the levels of non cadre joint secretaries and additional
secretaries.

The Andhra Pradesh Secretariat cadres comprise four distinct units for purposes of cadre
management viz., the single unit comprising all departments of secretariat, other than Finance,
Law and Legislature; which are independent units of appointment, transfer, promotion etc in
respect of secretariat services posts, the single unit being managed centrally by the General
Administration Department. The respective departments manage other units. Basic structure of
all departments comprise similar categories of posts but are governed by different rules to meet
the specific qualifications required for the personnel in these units. For instance, whereas a mere
graduation is enough for appointment in single unit as an assistant section officer; entrance to the

91
department of Law in the same category would in addition require a law degree. In the case of
Finance, the qualification required is graduation in Economics, Mathematics or Commerce

There is no direct recruitment to any category in the secretariat service except the initial posts of
TCA, Stenographer and Assistant Section Officer. An assistant section officer entering the
secretariat by direct recruitment or by promotion of a typist cum assistant could in course of
time by promotion go the categories of SO, Asst. Secretary, Deputy Secretary, Joint Secretary
and Additional Secretary. In the Legislature department they can hope to go right to the top if
lucky. To make matters worse unending periods of ban on direct recruitment has nullified even
this recruitment at the ASO level; and in its place Typist and Junior Assistants were repeatedly
promoted to the category of Assistant Section Officers. A quick survey of this would reveal the
extent to which direct recruitment has been sacrificed impacting on quality. With the laudable
purpose of enabling officers experienced in the directorate being appointed in the secretariat a
provision has been made for appointment by transfer to the category of assistant section officers.
But they are only ministerial service officers and not technical officers of the department
concerned, adding technical subject expertise to the pool.

The categories comprising deputy secretary, joint secretary and additional secretary are grouped
and divided between IAS Officers and Officers of the Secretariat. This provides for lateral
induction of IAS Officers experienced in field implementation to fill the posts in the higher
secretariat service. A detailed break-up of the combined cadre of additional secretaries/joint
secretaries/deputy secretaries between IAS Officers and secretariat service officers ie cadre posts
and non cadre posts and the manner in which they have actually been filled currently is depicted
in the following statement :

Department-wise Cadre Strength of Circulating Officers in Secretariat

S Category of Post Cadre Post Filled By

No Strength IAS Secretariat Others
Officers
AS JS DS AS JS DS AS JS DS
1 GAD 14 1 1 5 2 1
2 Finance 10 2 1 3 3 1
3 Planning 4 1 2 1
4 Industries & 4 1 2
Commerce
5 INCAD 6 1 3 1
6 PR & RD 8 1 3 1 1
7 A&C 3 1 1 1
8 AH & F 1 1
9 CA & FCS -
10 Revenue 6 2 1 1 2
11 Housing 1 1
12 SW 3 1 1
13 BCW 1 1

92
 14 Education 6 1 1 2 1
15 WD CW & DW 2 1 1
16 L&TF 1 1
17 MA & UD 3 1 1
18 HM & FW 3 1 1 2
19 TR & B 2 1 1 1
20 MW 2 1
21 Home 3 1 2
22 EFST 1 1
23 Energy 1 1
24 YATC 2
25 PE 1 1 1 2
26 IT & C 1 1
27 IID 1 1
28 RS & AD 1 1
Total 91 5 5 5 5 13 32 7 6 4

Note: Strength of posts forming part of IAS cadre strength 29. Non cadre posts for Secretariat Service Officers in the general
pool 49. Rest others. 78 posts thus apportioned in the categories of AS, JS, DS level. Actual number of posts at the level 91.
29 cadre posts filled by only 15 IAS Officers. Vacancies filled by 9 IFS Officers and 8 Central Service Officers.

The only other posts to which there is lateral entry that too for officers other than IAS Officers
are the posts of Secretary in the Law Department to which a district judge is appointed on tenure.
This shows that the secretariat is virtually a closed circuit being the exclusive preserve of the
secretariat officers and officers of the Indian Administrative Service. However, of late the cadre
posts earmarked for IAS Officers are contrary to the cadre regulations, temporarily decadred and
filled in by others, many of whom belong to the Indian Forest Service and some officers of the
central services like Income Tax, Railways, etc who seek sojourn in the State through temporary
deputation. The rules do not provide for any subject specialists in any department of secretariat.
There are very rare instances of officers on special duty being brought in at a senior level like an
economist in the Planning department, a town planner drawn from the Town Planning
Department in the MA&UD department, a Commercial Tax expert from the Commercial Tax
Service in the Revenue department and the Chief Engineer in the Irrigation department. The
recently formed IT&C department of course draws upon IT specialists. The intention of bringing
in IAS Officers into the secretariat, by virtue of their field experience as Collectors, Heads of
Departments and Chief Executives as is the case in the Central Secretariat is to induct expert
knowledge of subjects and experience in implementation of plans and programmes to guide
policy formulation. This objective is being belied now a days to a considerable extent by the
reluctance of and non posting of IAS Officers to join posts earmarked for them at a level below
secretary. In the interest of administration this must be made mandatory, every officer belonging
to the service should have had a stint at this level. Instead officers belonging to various central
services are posted with hardly any experience relevant to the subjects dealt with in Government
and no knowledge of the policy and implementation area except their intellectual capability and
service record.

At the Centre there is direct recruitment not merely at the level of assistant section officer but
also at the level of section officer. As a matter of fact the Central Secretariat Service is one of the

93
Central Services forming part of the All India Services to which recruitment is made based on
the basis of All India Recruitment Examination conducted through Union Public Service
Commission. This explains the decidedly higher quality of the staff in the central secretariat
compared to their counterparts in the State secretariat. In the interest of administration a similar
pattern has to be introduced in the secretariat in Andhra Pradesh, possibly by deciding to have
direct recruitment to the category of section officers as one of the categories for direct
recruitment, as in the case of Centre, in the Group-I services. With the full scale introduction of
desk officer system recommended earlier the category of ASO in its present form should be
converted as and progressively replaced by assistants to desk officer to the extent required.

Apart from flattening the cadre structure to that extent by modification of cadre base and the
introduction of direct recruitment at the level of section officer as indicated above, it is also
essential to provide for induction in each department, of a specified number of technical subject
specialists or experts in the subjects relevant to the department. In the Central Secretariat there
are experts attached to various ministries including particularly the Planning Commission. For
example, the Department of Environment should have officers specialized in environmental
issues; Agriculture department should similarly have agricultural experts. Planning department
should have economists having experience in the planning process and officers who can
undertake scientific programme evaluation. Land and Urban Development Departments could
similarly have experts / advisors geographic information systems, urban planning, traffic and
transportation. In Projects Departments, project management expertise is presently wanting. The
categories, qualifications and cadre strength and the manner of recruitment, the tenure of
appointment, etc of these officers should be decided after a careful study of the nature and
complexity of the subjects dealt with in each department of secretariat. This would bring in the
much needed specialization and technical subject expertise in each department. Such officers
could be drawn by selective allotment of recruits to the secretariat with reference to their
academic qualification relevant to the subject of the department, by tenure appointments on
deputation from heads of departments and corporate entities or the universities and research
institutions at higher levels of the hierarchy. Another way is to have technical advisers drawn
from market on tenure to be attached to departments basing on the subject expertise found
lacking.

The recruitment pattern in the Law and the Legislature Departments also need drastic
modifications. As things stand today a graduate typist of the department without any legal
qualifications can, if he somehow acquires a Law degree hope to go right upto the category of
Additional Secretary in the Law department today. The poor quality of drafting can be directly
attributed to inadequacy of the present linguistic and legal knowledge and competence of
drafting legislations, rules, agreements and contracts. Unlike in the case of all other secretariat
departments where cadre officers enter at the level of a deputy secretary onwards, there is no
such thing in the Law department or Legislature department indicating the need for infusing
fresh blood at the intermediate level with knowledge, experience and expertise in the field which
purpose is served substantially by posting of cadre officers in the other departments. A part of
the reasons for Government loosing cases in the courts can be attributed to poor drafting ability
and lack of expertise in the legal advice tended to departments. Poor drafts lead to doubts,
difficulties and disputes. Therefore there is need for revising the qualifications for initial
appointment in the department and also need for lateral induction at intermediate level of deputy

94
secretary and above. Somewhat similar position obtains today in Legislature Department also
where one could go right to the top as already mentioned.

Civil Service Reforms and HR Development

Structure provides the medium to get things done. It enables deployment of personnel in the
slots earmarked by the structure. Better structures can therefore facilitate more sound policy.
Poor manpower can belie the hopes a good structure generates. On the other hand, a good
mechanic can make even a bad machine function.

Inept personnel management and virtual absence of human resources development efforts
coupled with, based on the less than optimal structure described above in the secretariat and the
State in general progressive weakening of the whole system, as evidenced by the growing
dichotomy between principles as enshrined in the codes and rules and precept in actual action,
declining values and work ethic, unconscionable and at times intentional delay, growing
indiscipline, penetration of corruption within the entire system, literal adherence to procedure
without requisite commitment to performance, unresponsiveness to the needs of the citizen,
loosening control, supervision and direction, declining standards of performance, political
interference etc adversely affecting neutrality of the civil servants the faith of citizen in the
system. Coupled with the declining standards of conduct and performance which the State has
failed to check, there has also been failure on its part to modernize the system and develop the
human resources to improve the way the Government is run to meet the growing challenges
posed by sweeping changes across the world. The major initiatives taken from time to time have
not resulted in any appreciable change in the composition, character and competence in the civil
services. Instead these initiatives have got so totally routinized that they have failed to have any
impact in the system. At the same time the declining trend has been continuing. While every
one recognizes civil service reform as an essential part of public sector reform, requisite political
and administrative will is not exhibited in strengthening and reforming the civil service set up.
In order to remedy this situation it is essential to make institutional arrangements to link it
directly to the Chief Minister.

Looking into specifics one cannot fail to notice that in the State direct recruitment does not take
place at different levels of the system at regular intervals in the prescribed ratios through
independent recruiting process based solely on the principle of merit. Instead adhoc, so called
temporary recruitment, which for all intents and purposes become final, is done through
Employment Exchange, under influence without merit or equity principles locally foregoing
State-wide competition resulting more often in incompetent persons getting recruited. Even
when direct recruitment has taken place in the past for several decades, after long intervals
bunching of recruitment results leading to the entry of at times even hundreds of candidates in
the same category, often with relaxation in age to compensate for the long gap in recruitment
which could produce even the ridiculous prospect of the first person in the seniority list
becoming the Head of the Department in course of time while the last one in the same
recruitment might remain in one of the initial categories for want of opportunities, resulting in
utter frustration impacting on performance. When finally direct recruitment takes place after a
long ban, the number of persons actually recruited falls far short of the number required under
the rules to be reserved for direct recruits, for two reasons, the first is those who are temporarily

95
recruited are regularly appointed through special qualifying tests without requiring them to go
through the regular process of direct recruitment for regularization subject to selection by the
Commission reducing vacancies to that extent. Secondly, temporary promotions would have
taken place in intermediate category vacancies disregarding the ratio between direct recruits and
promotees for promotion in the slots which would have otherwise been filled by direct
recruitment in the interest of getting work done. Their services are regularized in the temporarily
promoted category to the detriment of the interest of direct recruits to that category reducing the
number of persons directly recruited as a result. This sets of a chain reaction of service disputes
right from the start relating to inter-se seniority which goes on for years in successive courts
going at times right up to the Supreme Court permeating up the hierarchy in course of time. An
offshoot of this litigation is often stay of direct recruitment and or promotion to the relevant
category till such time the dispute gets settled finally in the highest court. The result is the posts
remain vacant, work remains unattended and the people suffer; giving an impression that civil
service positions are merely intended to provide promotion opportunities to Government servants
and not primarily to discharge the duties enjoined on such posts for which recruitment is made.
The via media found by the administration to find persons to man such posts even at times going
up to the category of Head of the Department is to make the so called in charge arrangements by
posting an officer of the lower category on his own scale of pay and perquisites. It is a great pity
that in this State disputes arising as a consequence of integration of services at the time of
formation of Andhra Pradesh has continued throughout the service life of officers in many
services with its deleterious effects on the administration all these years.

It would be incorrect to say that ban on recruitment has only been a result of peculiar intractable
political factors specific to the State. It has also been ably fueled by repeated ban on direct
recruitment on grounds of economy measures. But the actual manner in which this ban has
operated has made a mockery of the ban itself in that paradoxically, it has facilitated faster
temporary recruitment compromising quality and defeating the very purpose of the ban; whereas
commission would have taken years for normal recruitment resulting in greater economy by
permitting direct recruitment. Ban on temporary recruitment even lead to engaging casual labour
or addition to work charged establishment or the work gets done on piece rate wherever feasible!
The highest constitutional body for recruitment ie the Public Service Commission is also partly
to blame for this state of affairs because of excruciatingly painful delay in the process of
recruitment which has at times taken years of course partly contributed by stay orders of courts.
Secondly, even this august body has not been free of allegations in the matter of recruitment
compromising quality. The recruitment process itself is undertaken in a mechanical manner on a
leisurely pace without adequate weight for qualification, experience or merit. The role of the
Constitutional agency itself is being diluted by withdrawing growing number of categories
otherwise within its natural purview to facilitate departmental / local recruitment.

Want of final seniority lists leads to penetration of disputes in the matter of promotions to higher
categories also with its snowballing effect all the way up the hierarchy. In order to get over this
situation temporarily, temporary promotions are resorted to compromising merit on the ground
that these promotions are temporary done otherwise than in accordance with rules on an adhoc
basis foregoing merit at times even disregarding fitness which is the criterion for promotion to
non selection category even based on seniority cum fitness. Even in selection categories
promotions disregarding the merit principle is taking place as a matter of routine, demoralizing

96
sincere, hardworking and efficient officers affecting work culture adversely. In a civil service
system where there are no incentives for productivity or performance depriving rightful
promotion on the basis of merit could be quite damaging to the system. Attempts to tamper with
well established ratios between persons eligible for promotion to a category belonging to two
different services on consideration other than public interest has also contributed to prolonged
litigation and stay of courts with resultant vacancies for long periods and lack of cohesion in the
service. For want of final seniority lists and at times even provisional seniority lists on account
of disputes and stay orders as aforesaid the practice of preparation of regular panels for
promotion at prescribed intervals and within the time specified has also gone into disuse leading
to delay in filling of vacancies essential for discharge of duties enjoined on the posts. In an
organization which constantly complains of excess workload such vacancies for prolonged
periods apart from contributing to genuine delay also provides a convenient excuse for not doing
work. One could be even more lethargic in the face of such workload precisely on that pretext!

It is a well recognized principle that academic qualifications prescribed for a post should be in
keeping with the requirements of the nature and technical complexity of the job. By and large it
can be mentioned that separation of policy from implementation between the secretariat and the
directorates has also led to the secretariat becoming a generalist institution and the directorates
the technical arm in charge of implementation and providing policy inputs of a specialist
technical nature. This is evident in the composition of the secretariat hierarchy which can be said
to be the almost exclusive preserve of generalists with a few exceptions which only prove the
rule. It is a salutary principle that there should be lateral entry by way of direct recruitment /
deputation / transfer / tenure appointments at specified levels in the hierarchy consistent with the
requirement to provide opportunities for promotion on the basis of merit, which has not been
accepted in the secretariat except to the extent of cadre posts and the post of Law Secretary.

These are vital gaps which need to be filled particularly at the present times in view of the all
round technology and scientific development that have taken place including in the field of
Information and Communication Technologies. Today we are living in a knowledge society of
learning organizations in which adequate training through a wide array of means such as
formal education at all levels, on the job training and continuing education, distance learning and
use of modern technology, coaching and mentoring should be provided to meet all the existing
and new demands and requirements. New information management technologies are
revolutionizing the work of organizations and methods of delivery of public sector services
which could be categorized as information technology, performance indicators and benchmarks,
to measure, monitor and evaluate, best practices and methods and skills to handle sensitive issues
and critical information and tools in policy making. But the pattern of recruitment and
qualifications for entry into service in the secretariat continues to be the same without any
change whatsoever necessitating a thorough review of the qualifications and experience required
for entry into different departments in the secretariat at the various levels of the hierarchy.

Administrative structures in the country today have been considerably weakened with increasing
politicization of bureaucracy and interference at all levels of the administrative hierarchy
including in selections, appointments, postings, promotions and transfers and even in disciplinary
matters for criminal misconduct of even lower functionaries in the field even in respect of
categories where cadre control solely rests with the head of the department or lower functionaries

97
seriously jeopardizing discipline, civil service neutrality and resulting in corrupt relationships in
the hierarchy. As rightly pointed out in UN document, with the emergence of politicians as most
important actors, they have acquired supremacy in all decision making matters and with this
shift in the power base particularly in civil service appointments, promotions and the use of
discretionary decision making authority, certain side effects were inevitable, a new trait of
administrative culture emerged slowly; the existence of a parallel black administration where
influence, favours, money, privileges, misuse of public funds, the falsifying of records and the
bending of rules and regulations play the critical role. Still a relatively well functioning
administrative apparatus exists in the country despite wide corruption where in the words of the
World Bank State inefficiency and the corruption have co-existed with a relatively competent
and efficient civil service, albeit one whose quality has suffered a noticeable decline. With
increasing dilution of control has come progressive neglect of inspection and supervision and
dilution of accountability of subordinate staff. Compromise of civil service neutrality and
growth of indiscipline by virtue of disregard for the basic principles of civil service system have
resulted in very low administrative capacity, considerable waste of resources and serious
irregularities apart from delay in disposal of business and time and cost overruns.

Statutorily assuring a reasonable tenure to employees can put an end to the chronic problem of
frequent staff transfers which affect proper discharge of work causes dislocation which is
otherwise avoidable undermine service quality disrupt managerial continuity and accentuate
corruption by creating a market in posts in addition to the recently introduced practice of
formal counseling for transfers reducing discretion in the process by holding annual open
consultation to allocate postings in the presence of applicants based on transparent and published
criteria. Karnataka has gone to the extent of computerizing such processes and introducing a
legislation to regulate transfers. Tamil Nadu has also enacted a legislation and is said to be
introducing computerized counseling. Tamil Nadu has in addition established the norms of 3-7
year tenure, limited transfers to 20% of cadre strength and restricted transfers to the vacation
season. In addition they have proposed a public transfer database on the internet to track
transfers. An initiative in respect of higher civil service is the constitution of a Civil Service
Board comprising the topmost civil servants to ensure appointments on merit.

Thus restoration of the age old principles of civil service management, regular direct
recruitment/promotion through constitutionally mandated agency, flattening the hierarchy in the
secretariat section, introduction of direct recruitment to SO category as at the Centre, induction
of subject experts, review of qualifications for recruitment, reassertion of the merit principle in
the matter of direct recruitment and promotion as aforesaid are measures to improve the initial
quality at the time of appointment to the relevant posts. This has to be supplemented by
intensive and systematic pre-entry and in-service training at the time of appointment as
applicable, with refresher course at regular intervals including upon promotion to new posts
requiring additional skills. Simultaneously with these HR initiatives there is need also to review
comprehensively the decades old scheme of departmental tests for new entrants to service in
order to update the syllabus and the modalities of conducting the tests. Unlike at the centre
where there is limited departmental examinations for promotion at prescribed intervals there is
hardly any such system in the State, this is an additional measure to ensure quality in the
selection process.

98
Public sector reform involves developing support systems to nurture an attitude of service
excellence in meeting the needs of the public with high standards of quality, courtesy and
responsiveness. It is about fostering an environment that induces and welcomes continuous
change for greater efficiency and effectiveness by employing modern management tools and
techniques while paying attention to moral and welfare of public officers. Civil service reform
then encompasses both institution building and human resources development in a unique
combination of strategies, programmes, policies and institutional tools. There has been a
growing realization that concerted efforts to bring down the size of public service in order to
reduce the costs of Government by undertaking a conscious process of retrenchment as part of
the macro economic adjustment programmes has not succeeded resulting in a progressive shift in
emphasis for capacity building for ensuring better governance. This is particularly so in a
country like India with a strong tradition of State administration in spite of its declining
effectiveness and growing corruption, the civil service reform has to reckon the traditional
qualities of respect for authority and deep notion of duty. The State continues to be treated as
engines of socio economic development. As observed in a United Nations paper on public
sector reform while institutional reinforcement entails modernization, empowerment,
readjustment and often re-engineering of organizations, human resource development, in turn,
implies empowerment, equipping civil servants with skills, competencies, knowledge, values and
attitudes, commensurate to their tasks.

The characteristics of public service management being substantially different from business
management, automatic adoption of business principles in the management of public service
cadres cannot succeed in all cases. The civil service tradition has been built up based on civil
service values of commitment to public service, concern for public interest and neutrality and not
necessarily based on incentives and accountability of output. What are more valued are
challenging job opportunities, a sense of accomplishment, recognition of an individuals
achievements and respect and fair treatment. It is essential to reinstil these to rejuvenate the
public services.

There has been a worldwide move in the field of public management to instill greater service
orientation and responsiveness to the citizen with less emphasis on control of resources and
inputs in the course of implementation of policy and programmes. Measures in this direction
include citizen charters and chartermarks, transparency and accountability to the citizens through
introduction of statutory right to information, speedier and streamlined redress of grievances and
recourse to Ombudsman etc. Side by side with the above measures it is equally important to re-
instill in the public servants adherence to civil service values and discipline.

The General Administration (Services, Special and SC) Department performs the personnel
functions of the Andhra Pradesh Government except to the extent it concerns pay and
allowances, pensions and other conditions of service involving finance. A brief review of their
working convinces one that except routine day to day management of personnel and dealing with
individual service problems and routine clarifications relating to civil service rules and
procedures these departments have not been dealing with substantive issues of personnel and
human resource development. No reform efforts with particular reference to streamlining and
modernizing recruitment and promotion, remuneration, incentives, management information

99
systems, performance appraisal, training and capacity building to improve service delivery and
productivity, management technologies, skills, knowledge, and attitudes and issues of values,
ethics, integrity and professionalism have been in its portfolio of activities. Neither have any
efforts been made to simplify and update civil service regulations or to modernize the same by
undertaking their comprehensive review. The conscious efforts made in the recent past have
been the result of initiatives taken by the Centre for Good Governance and the new wing of
Governance Public Management and Administrative Reforms set up in 2001 as part of the new
initiative for reforming the State public sector in the State. Public sector reform as has already
been indicated above deals not merely with reform of structures, but also, comprehensive civil
service reforms in the areas noted above. Reform efforts would have to focus on developing
appropriate institutions, recruiting, nurturing and rewarding merit oriented and motivated
personnel, capable of coherent and well articulated policy formulation and close collaboration
with the public and private sectors.

In order to enable these reform measures there is need for comprehensive central personnel
policy agency to be established in the General Administration Department to formulate and
implement personnel and human resource management policies and programmes to increase the
efficiency and effectiveness of the public service. Such an arrangement was made in Malaysia in
the department of the Prime Minister in as early as 1977 when successful public sector reform
initiatives were started there.

Performance appraisal system introduced in Malaysia in 1992 had the following objectives viz.,
to create reliable and comprehensive procedure for work performance and a system for
measuring performance to extend the use of performance appraisal for personnel function such
as promotion, placement and training and enhance the participation of heads of departments and
all levels of supervisors in appraising the performance of their officers especially in work
planning, supervision, motivation, counseling and development. In addition the Malaysian
Government revised their code of conduct and introduced a new code in 1993 highlighting the
following goals:

1. Highly disciplined civil servants who are responsible and committed to their jobs;
2. Excellence in job performance;
3. High productivity and quality in the delivery of services; and
4. A clean civil service, free of any taint that could mar its image.

Similar revision of the Code and its enforcement in right earnest are essential further steps. A
comprehensive civil service law to provide for regulation of recruitment, selection, career
management, transfer, accountability, transparency, training, job analysis, remuneration, tenure,
etc is yet to be introduced in the country or in the State more than half a century after the State
has become a Republic. The Government of India has recently initiated this process with the
assistance of the Centre for Good Governance. The State Government could coordinate their
action in this connection with the Central Government.

An allied initiative was the introduction of public service innovation awards for individuals who
have advanced and implemented ideas to improve the quality of public service and public service
excellent service awards to those who have rendered services exceeding expectations beyond the

100
call of duty in the year 1995. The Government of India incidentally has initiated a process for
introduction of such public service awards in the country. A similar initiative on the part of the
State would be a welcome step. In this context, it is worth remembering that in the mid 1980s,
the State Government had introduced service medals.

Other components of civil service reform could include

1. Installing civil service personnel and management information systems;

2. Staff audits;
3. Improving training systems;
4. Simplifying the legal framework for governing the civil service;
5. Ensuring the staffing of administrative posts by qualified personnel partly through
incentives.

An initiative in this direction would be a special monitoring unit attached to the Office of the
Chief Minister to monitor governance and public management and administrative reforms. As
commented by the OECD in a paper there is a fundamental problem in public management of
separating rhetoric from reality, and hopes and aspirations from actual achievement. Much
reform activity in Governments exists in slogans and new formal processes but does not
significantly change behavior. Many more reforms are initiated than are ever followed through.
This is because real change in Government is very difficult and it requires important and radical
steps to change the status quo and it must be consistently followed over a number of years so that
it could produce enduring results and a change in attitudes and culture itself.

Real change depends on elected leaders with vision and realistic strategies for achieving that
vision. Signals from the Chief Minister of the importance he assigns to specific strategic moves
to reform governance is essential for any such measure to succeed, wherein the high level of
commitment on the part of Government is made explicit. Further, ownership of such initiatives
by successive Governments is imperative to ensure continuity as is evident from the
liberalization policies as is pursued by the successive Governments at the Centre from the
beginning of the 1990s to date.

Strengthening Policy Capacity

In the Government of India there are several specialized agencies, which have been specifically
set up ever since independence, assigned the special task of identifying policy alternatives,
undertaking policy analysis and presenting policy options and likely implications and impacts,
associating specialists and technical experts and at times outside bodies in the task. The
Planning Commission is such a body established to undertake precisely this task. Special
advisory councils are also set up to assist in this task at the Centre, an example of which is the
Economic Advisory Council attached to the Prime Minister. The United Nations has advised
that country should institute some form of public / private councils in major policy areas such as
macro economics, industrial and agricultural development and social services.

Alternative policy sources outside Government is another initiative that was explored by the
Government of India, quite early on like establishment of institutions like the National Council

101
of Applied Economic Research, Institute of Applied Manpower Research, the National Council
of Education Research and Training, the National Institute of Education, Planning and
Administration, the National Institute of Family Planning and Health, and the Indian Institute of
Public Administration. These specialist institutions provided support to conduct policy oriented
research in areas concerning them. As an extension of this, a couple of State institutes have also
come up, an example being State Institute of Education, Research and Training. A parallel
initiative was taken by the Planning Commission to fund research and encourage scholars to
conduct studies on issues of priority for the Government by funding them initially through its
Research Planning Committee. This was however, discontinued and in its place, the Indian
Council of Social Science Research was set up to facilitate more or less the same objectives of
promoting research in social sciences by keeping track of literature and trends of research in the
country, facilitating research in specific issues and conducting seminars and courses in
workshops. A wide spectrum of subjects are covered relating to agriculture and rural
development, industrial structure and growth, income distribution and poverty, education, health,
nutrition, special problems of population groups, energy, technology, ecology, environment and
including social, cultural and institutional aspects of development. The ICSSR has assisted 27
research institutes through out the country in these areas by giving block grants and project
funds. The two institutes assisted by the Council in Andhra Pradesh are the IPE, Hyderabad and
the Centre for Economic and Social Studies (CESS). The latest on the part of the Government of
India in this series of initiatives is the assistance provided to the Indian Institute of Management,
Bangalore, the National Institute of Public Policy etc to assist in research, training and education
in Public Policy. Deputing senior civil servants abroad for specialized courses in public policy
and developmental issues is another significant effort in capacity building of civil service
officers in charge of policy and acquiring policy capacity. A conscious effort is necessary on the
part of State Government to associate such institutions in the conduct of policy research and
training of public servants to provide assistance to Government in strengthening its policy
capacity.

As rightly pointed out by Kuldeep Mathur, while over the course of last 50 years there has been
opening of the Government to alternate policy advice, the general perception continues to be that
it is a closed system. The political leadership within the country has neither the inclination nor
institutional support to seek alternate policy advice ------------------ The political leadership also
does not command staff support for generating alternative policies. The political parties do not
have well manned research cells and members of Parliament do not have professional staff to
support them in articulating new ideas.

Apart from such independent institutions conducting specific research in policy issues, a parallel
measure has been the establishment of time bound special commissions to make specific
recommendations, major examples being, the Administrative Reforms Commission of
Government of India, Law Commission, etc. Short duration committees are also set up from
time to time for the same purpose. Commissioning special studies through professional private
consultancy groups is a relatively new method of acquiring policy guidance. The State
Government has not been habituated to seeking policy assistance from such professional
organizations, commissions, committees, experts or consultancy bodies as a matter of course.
Departments of Government have to explore these alternate policy sources to strengthen their
capacity to formulate coherent, strategic, long term policy. A noticeable effort towards futuristic

102
planning undertaken through such consultancy in the State involved the preparation of the Vision
2020 document through the renowned management consultancy organization. An initiative of
the present Government in this area is the appointment of a committee under the Chairmanship
of Jayathi Ghosh to study problems of the agricultural sector in the wake of widespread
continuing episodes of suicides by farmers in the State to suggest measures to find solutions to
this human problem of vital concern.

Civil Society Participation

The latest development in the field of policy capacity and implementation efficiency is the
emergence of the trend of involving grassroots civil society organizations to facilitate citizen
interface in policy consultation, feedback on implementation from the field and assessment of the
impact of policy on the society to evolve better policies, enhance efficiency in the
implementation of policy and to maximize the impact of such policy. This goes beyond what
was being resorted to in the past when Government at times consulted industry associations,
trade unions, specific professional groups etc on specific policy issues. Policy consultation is
progressively becoming an essential element of public policy making. Governance initiatives
involve today not merely a one way consultation or mere feedback, but the association of
stakeholders and citizens in the process of policy formulation and implementation through the
medium of a wide spectrum of civil society organizations. Government - citizen relations
cover a broad spectrum of interactions at each stage of policy making cycle : from policy design
through implementation to evaluation (OECD) which has progressed from the stage of
information to citizens to consultation with citizens, for getting feedback now coming to active
participation with Government in which citizens engage in the policy making process by
proposing policy options and shaping the policy dialogue leaving the responsibility finally to the
Government. Governance reforms tend to emphasize participatory systems for elements of civil
society to become actively involved in policy and programme formulation and their
implementation and an effective and transparent system and process for control and
accountability in Government activities.

Governments have to actively engage in the provision of information particularly in the wake of
the Right to Information Act, through publication of annual reports, brochures, leaflets,
websites; providing information through information centres, toll free telephone numbers etc
directly and through media coverage, advertising and through civil society organizations
indirectly. Consultation tools to receive feedback should include opinion polls and surveys,
circulation of draft policies, laws and rules for comments from citizens, through public hearings,
discussions through focus groups, citizen panels and workshops. Engaging citizen in policy
deliberation is done through special tools like citizens fora, conferences, citizen juries etc. The
United Kingdom has initiated a unique experiment of undertaking such selective consultation
with members of a body of 3500 citizens representatives from all walks of life, the sample for
consultation being chosen depending on the subject on which such consultation is sought. The
latest trend is the process of pre budget consultation with civil society groups and the citizens
which the State undertook recently. Such wide ranging consultations should receive continued
attention of Government and should become a mandatory requirement of policy formulation
process.

103
Information Communication Technologies can act as powerful tools to aid the Government and
administrations to bring the citizens and the administration together online through provision of
online information, through Government websites and portals facilitate consultation through e-
mail facility to citizen, online chat and video conferencing; and to actively associate citizen in
policy making through online discussion groups. Care should be taken to ensure that the digital
divide does not make this elitist exclusive affair keeping the common man out of it. ICT will be
a matchless tool in aiding information, communication, consultation and association of people in
policy planning and implementation and the State Government will be well advised to intensify
its efforts in this field.

Noting that policy development and coordination are complex, multifaceted issues that require a
mix of perspectives in various time dimensions so as to analyze the immediate impact on direct
beneficiaries, as well as long term consequences and to examine implications of various options
from political, economic and financial points of view, a UN Report has suggested the following
measures in order to improve civil service capacity for policymaking which are commended for
option by the State:

1. Releasing units / individuals from routine pressures to work on strategic thinking;

2. Developing highly qualified expertise in the higher civil service, with links to
autonomous research and policy institutions that can provide relevant information;
3. Working with research and policy institutions in the policy process at the relevant stages
to enhance decision making;
4. Establishing reliable and readily available statistical information (including common
database that could be accessed by different departments);
5. Expanding and deepening policy processes to include real participation of relevant
groups in a spirit of genuine trust and cooperation to facilitate both acceptance and
effective execution; and
6. Seeking to link process and policy in overlapping issues into relevant focus.

Policy Coherence

Public Governance and Territorial Development Directorate of the OECD has identified eight
tools for coherent decision making:

1. Political commitment, (being a pre-condition and a tool to enhance coherence);

2. Establishing a strategic policy framework which helps to ensure the individual policies
are consistent with the Governments goals and priorities;
3. Sound sources of advise based on clear definition and good analysis of issues with
explicit indications of possible inconsistencies;
4. Existence of a central overview and coordination capacity to ensure horizontal
consistency among policies;
5. A mechanism to anticipate detect and resolve policy conflicts early in the process to help
identify inconsistencies and reduce incoherence;
6. Mechanism for effective reconciliation between policy priorities and budget imperatives;

104
 7. Implementation procedures and monitory mechanism designed to ensure that policies can
be adjusted in the light of progress of implementation, new information and changing
circumstances; and
8. An administrative culture that promotes cross sectoral cooperation and a systematic
dialogue between different policy communities capable of contributing to strengthening
coherence.

To quote an occasional paper of the OECD Governments are subject to diverge in policy
tensions often epitomized in the conflicting sectoral interests of line ministries, which vie with
each other for financial resources, while the budgetary ministry characteristically seeks to control
outlays. In some countries a degree of policy competition is deliberately maintained between the
line ministries to ensure a level of creative tension and to enhance the contestability of policy
advice. In all countries, important trade offs between diverging interests have to be made at
highest level. Inconsistent policies entail higher risk of duplication, inefficient spending, a
lower quality of service, difficulty in meeting goals and ultimately reduced capacity to govern. It
is to be ensured however that measures to achieve greater policy coherence do not result in
excessive control and consequent loss of flexibility and creativity in policy making system.

Policies have to be coordinated in order to be coherent so that they are consistently applied
equitably and in an effective fashion. This is particularly so in view of the increasing
complexities of issues impacting on different areas of society and affecting different sectors and
stakeholders. Moreover they could be such that easy reconciliation of conflicting interest is not
possible. Horizontal coherence is sought to be achieved in order to make individual policies
mutually consistent by improving communication across levels of Government and in turn
facilitating programme implementation by increased vertical coherence. Policy has to focus not
merely on the present day and has to be effective in the future as well duly taking note of
fundamental changes in course of time in the economic, social, democratic and environmental
areas. The secretariat would be more concerned with ensuring cross sectoral horizontal
coherence over time. Planning and budgeting and regulation processes help Government to set
priorities before the Government and to undertake strategic planning to reconcile conflicts and
balance sectoral priorities in order to build a detailed work plan comprising coherent
programmes.

Coordination of Policy

The Secretariat is the administrative headquarters of the centre of the Executive Government
assisting the Chief Minister and the Council of Ministers of the State in the coordination of the
process of policy formulation and decisions, and activities allied to it viz., communication,
oversight of implementation, monitoring and evaluation. In a Parliamentary system of
Government like ours modeled on the British Collegial system, the Council of Ministers is the
main instrument of decision making based on collective responsibility of the members
constituting the Council, the functions and procedures of which are outlined in the Constitution
and the Business Rules framed under it. The State continues to follow the political model as
contrasted to the quasi legislative or advisory model of Executive in which the Council of
Ministers acts as the political apex concentrating on key political issues of policy based on the
party manifesto without going into details of the legislative aspects.

105
As discussed earlier the secretariat can be segregated into two distinct wings viz., the
coordinating departments in charge of horizontal and temporal coordination of activities of
Government; and the regulatory and service delivery departments in charge of details of sectoral
policy and oversight of implementation of decisions, plans and programmes in respect of
subjects in its charge. The main functions of the coordinating departments which may be in need
of reform, modernization or modification could be identified as the following:

1. Assisting the Chief Minister in leading the Government and the Council of Ministers
including its committees in the discharge of their functions and providing logistical
support to them;
2. Enabling a framework for the process of policy making and contestability of policy duly
addressing interdepartmental concerns conflicts through consultation and coordination
mechanisms;
3. Discharging the vital task of effective communications to ensure coherent Government
message to the citizens, the private sector and the third sector;
4. Monitoring implementation of Cabinet decisions, policy, plans and programmes;
5. Coordinating with the Legislature Secretariat, Governors Secretariat, other Governments
and the Centre;
These functions are mainly discharged by the General Administration Department as has
already been examined in detail earlier
6. Providing the legal and legislative framework for the policy decisions implemented
mainly through the instrumentality of legislation including subordinate legislation by the
Executive with the assistance of Law and Legislative Affairs Department and the
Legislature Secretariat;
7. Linking Governments strategic vision and policy framework with annual operational
plans and programmes duly fitting them with the plan, budget and fiscal framework for
implementation done mainly through the Finance and Planning Departments;
8. Monitoring and evaluation of effectiveness of implementation of specific programmes,
part of which is undertaken by the Planning Department over and above what is expected
of the line departments in charge of specific programmes in their charge;
9. Providing technology support to policy formulation and programme implementation like
E-governance initiatives, presently discharged by the Information Communication and
Technology Department which could rightly belong to the General Administration
Department as part of its Governance Public Management and Administrative Reforms
Wing; and
10. Coordination of strategic, whole of Government, cross departmental issues of vital policy
like modernization of Government, civil service reforms etc.

The functional departments in charge of regulation and service delivery in respect of specific
subjects assigned to them primarily engage in interdepartmental coordination within the
secretariat and vertical coordination of implementation of policy on ground through its field
agencies in the form of statutory authorities, heads of departments or other corporate or assisted
entities set up for the purpose.

106
Review of the salient functions outlined above reveals the range of areas in which reform efforts
can be focused in order to build policy capacity, ensure coherence of policy, effectuate
coordination to address inter-sectoral concerns and whole of Government issues to resolve
interdepartmental conflicts within the strategic vision and plan outlined by the political
Executive, to effectively communicate decisions and seek feedback, monitor and evaluate
effectiveness of implementation of decisions, soundness of regulation, and quality of service
delivery and technology upgradation of these processes.

Attributes that are essential, which are however not present in adequate measure in the present
structures for policy formulation are:

1. Adhocism in the political process of policy making;

2. Incorrect understanding or intentional neglect of the role of policy with marked
preference for administrative tasks rather than policy formulation;
3. Absence of long range strategic planning;
4. Inadequacy of policy research and link with academic organizations for policy assistance;
5. Exclusion or non association of public in policy consultation and formulation of policy;
6. Weak, insufficient and inappropriate organizational capacity for policy formulation and
developing policy priorities;
7. Lack of whole of Government perspective in the process;
8. Absence of arrangements for appropriate feedback, close monitoring of implementation
of policy and assessment of impact thereof; and
9. Incorrect appreciation of the role of implementing agencies in policy development and
their exclusion from the process

It would not be an exaggeration to say that the present capacity of the administration to assist in
setting policy priorities, developing alternate policy options and carrying out policy analysis and
monitoring of effective implementation and evaluation of policies continue to be passive and
more reactive requiring capacity development in these fields. Strategic policy initiatives today
are derived from the political manifesto of the ruling party, initiatives on the part of the Chief
Minister, the ideas discussed in the Council etc. It could be through an address by the Head of
the State in the Legislative Assembly setting forth strategic political goals which the Government
wishes to pursue, statements of the Chief Minister or the Finance Minister on the occasion of
budget discussions in the legislature or through white papers setting for the specific strategic
sectoral policy initiatives. There has been no strategic policy unit in the past, or expert policy
advisers attached to the Cabinet wing of the General Administration Department. The political
policy initiatives have to be converted into concrete work plans setting forth alternatives,
analyzing legal, financial and social implications in respect of some, which may have severe or
conflicting impacts vis--vis established policy and may need to be developed coherently in the
secretariat.

Developing appropriate structures and sufficient capacity for making and coordinating policy is
a long term process that demands difficult decisions and enduring support. Without these
structures for disciplining and integrating the policy debate and questioning competing policy
options and their costs well developed and credible policies may never be formulated. It is
therefore essential to have a strong central capacity for macro economic and strategic policy

107
making, over and above the capacity for policy making within each ministry; mechanisms to
analyze and debate policies among Government agencies and institutional links to shareholders
outside the Government, which provide transparency, accountability and productive feedback.

The Prime Ministers Office in the United Kingdom now has a special strategic policy unit.
Such a standing arrangement attached to the Chief Ministers Office or the Cabinet Wing of the
General Administration Department would be a welcome step strengthening the strategic policy
capacity of the Government, more particularly, concerning whole of Government issues.

The Andhra Pradesh Planning Board as it is constituted today virtually remains an appendix to
the Planning Department without being integrated with it having a range of subject experts
employed to assist it. The Planning Commission at the Centre has the Prime Minister as the
Chairman and a Full Time Deputy Chairman. The Planning Commission and the Planning
Ministry at the Centre is an integrated organization unlike in the State. It also lacks subject
expertise in the range of subjects it is expected to handle. Making the Planning Board a real
instrument of developmental policy will be a step in the direction of strengthening policy
capacity.

Nearly 4 years ago a special wing of the General Administration Department called
Governance, Public Management and Administrative Reforms wing was set up on 24.7.2001
with the specific tasks of dealing with all matters relating to administrative reforms charged with
the responsibility to ensure implementation of all decisions and action plans relating to reform
processed through the sub-committees of Cabinet, Task Forces and expert groups set up to
operationalize the Vision document 2020 with the then emphasis on a SMART (simple, moral,
responsive and transparent) Government, lately refocused as CARING (committed, accountable,
responsive) Government through the departments of secretariat and heads of departments in
close coordination with and expert advise from the Centre for Good Governance. To facilitate
creative initiatives in and more successful implementation of comprehensive governance reform
efforts piloted by this wing of the General Administration Department, the Government have
also decided and established Strategy and Performance Innovation Units (SPIU) in key
departments like General Administration, Revenue, MAUD, PR & RD, Education, Health,
Industries and Commerce, Irrigation and Welfare Departments, Agriculture and Cooperation and
Home Departments. These units are a two tier body with a steering group under the
Chairmanship of Principal Secretary in charge of the department and the DG-CGG with a
technical support team comprising a consultant, system designer, short term consultants as
required along with a senior officer in the department. The unit will design, projectise and
support and oversee implementation and evaluation of reform action plan through strategic
review and policy analysis in consultation with CGG and act as a catalyst for change. A word of
caution to be added here is the imperative to continuously guard against the perennial problem of
reform initiatives or new steps initiated with much fanfare and high hopes of transforming the
efficiency and speed of governance and capacity of personnel loosing steam mid way due to shift
in emphasis or lack of political will or administrative determination or intentional sabotage on
the part of vested interests in bureaucracy bent upon perpetuating their control and unwilling to
change the old unproductive ways. One way of continuing to convey the highest political
executives determination in carrying through these reform initiatives and to enable him to review
the progress of implementation of these initiatives from time to time, it would be worthwhile

108
reassigning the status of ex-officio Principal Secretary or Secretary to the Director General of
Centre for Good Governance who provides the knowledge and expertise to the G.A (GPM&AR)
Department under the Special Chief Secretary. In addition a Governance Advisory Council
could be set up in the State with renowned experts in governance and administrative reforms
issues, academics, technical experts, civil society representatives and Government nominees to
advise the Chief Minister and Government on all aspects of governance, public management and
administrative reforms including suggesting strategic policy and reform initiatives, evaluating
implementation of measures suggesting mid course corrections required in the course of
implementation in the light of feedback from the citizens etc. This Council could be assisted by
the Director General Centre for Good Governance who would also act as an Ex-officio Principal
Secretary to Chief Minster as its Convener. The establishment of the Centre for Good
Governance in the State to assist Government in taking up policy, governance and e-Governance
initiatives which has by now earned a name for itself in the country and abroad, is a gem of an
initiative in this area taken by the Government of Andhra Pradesh with the assistance of DFID
capable of contributing to the objectives of building policy capacity and public sector reform.
The recently established Strategy Programme Initiatives Units (SPIUs) in the departments will be
a significant institutional initiative and strengthen sectoral policy capacity and research and
improve the quality of governance provided the choice of personnel for these units and the
interest evinced by the secretaries to Government concerned in taking advantage of such a
specialized unit in their department with the storehouse of knowledge and database provided by
the CGG.

Sectoral Policy Capacity

Individual departments are responsible for a specific policy area and discharge responsibilities
relating to sponsoring and implementing policy in respect of the subject, area or sector assigned.
It is equally essential to enhance all aspects of policy capacity in the individual line ministries
which are responsible for presenting policy papers in respect of subjects in their charge to the
Council of Ministers for decision, in order to enable them to develop high quality proposals to
undertake consultations in regard to the policy options and policy alternatives with experts in the
line departments, experts outside in the academic institutions and alternate policy institutions,
stakeholders groups, civil society bodies, etc depending on the nature, content and importance of
the paper under preparation, in order to arrive at the appropriate alternative after consideration of
all aspects and assessment of likely impacts in order to enable the Council of Ministers to take
informed decisions. To facilitate this, the departments require civil servants who have
knowledge and expertise in the relevant field of activity who are capable of going beyond mere
application of rules and provide substantive advice to enable appropriate decisions. They would
also need in-house experts in the department to facilitate this. Such experts could be drawn from
within the field department, specialist institutions attached to department or from outside for a
specific period. Alternatively, consultants with wide knowledge and experience of best practices
in the relevant area with intimate knowledge of political, administrative, social and economic
issues can be engaged specifically for a particular purpose or subject. To test the alternatives and
assess the likely impact, they would need to hold consultations with stakeholder groups, civil
society bodies, and the citizens at times which also help in improving the acceptability of the
proposed measure. In order to facilitate with outside consultation with the private sector, the
civil society bodies and the academic institutions, departments could think in terms of

109
constituting standing advisory committees in their departments. A new trend in this area which
is being resorted to is to hold opinion polls or surveys posing alternatives to ascertain public
opinion. If the proposal has cross sectoral implications inside interdepartmental consultation
within the secretariat would be essential.

Effective Cabinet Meetings

The General Administration Department servicing the Council has a major duty to ensure clear
and coherent policy in line with set Government objectives. The secretariat today cannot be said
to have enough expertise in professional policy capacity. The net result of incoherent and
conflicting policies would be suboptimal, ineffective and costly. Similarly, present day
monitoring of implementation of decisions is also of a very technical and general nature to the
extent whether the decision has been converted into an order of Government or made into
legislation within the time limit specified. Ordinarily, monitoring does not extend to an
assessment of the real impact of the policy. Assessment of the real impact which requires
continuous interaction with and feedback from the field implementing agencies by the line
department concerned is generally left to them. It goes without saying that effective policy is
one which has been modulated and modified in the light of experience derived by the field
agencies in the course of implementation. A well functioning secretariat is therefore crucial to
the pursuit of collective objectives of the Government in view of its complex linkages or inter
dependencies. The General Administration Department in its role as the Cabinet Secretariat is
the core instrument of such coordination headed by the Chief Secretary to Government who is
also the Head of the Civil Service. In this capacity it is in charge of the finalization of the time
table, subjects in the agenda for discussion in the Council of Ministers, scrutiny of the notes for
the Council submitted by the individual ministries to check for and ensure compliance of
procedural formalities in regard to legal conformity, interdepartmental consultation, financial and
budgetary regulations, convening of the meetings of the Council, recording of its decisions,
communication to the press and the public and ensuring feedback on implementation of the
decisions. Pursuing timely deliberations of the groups of ministers constituted by the Council for
in-depth analysis and recommendations on specific subjects assigned to it would also fall within
its purview. Interdepartmental concerns or conflicts which cannot be reconciled at the level of
the departments concerned by mutual consultation are arbitrated to the extent feasible by the
Chief Secretary in its capacity as the Secretary to the Cabinet so that agreed proposals or at least
proposals with weighed alternatives go before the Council with minimal disagreement to be
resolved in the Council. Occasionally there have been civil servants specially assigned this task
in the Chief Ministers Office. In the 1970s a specific coordination cell under the secretary to the
Chief Minister who was also Secretary GAD was established for some time. Recently a
Principal Secretary has been posted in the General Administration Department to be in charge of
coordination to assist the Chief Secretary. This is more in the nature of interdepartmental
administrative coordination and not for policy initiatives.

The decision making system in the secretariat culminates in Cabinet discussions, the Council of
Ministers being the apex of the coordinating structure. Cabinet meetings facilitate, as mentioned
by Michael Ben Gera:

110
 1. Taking a strategic view, establishing the overall objectives, setting priorities among them
and allocating resources to these priorities;
2. To discuss political and communication issues facing the Government;
3. To take major decisions on behalf of Government ensuring that all ministries are
committed to them;
4. To take lawful coherent decisions with financial and staffing resources backup; and
5. Assume collective responsibility for the performance.

It is the responsibility of Chief Secretary and the Cabinet Wing of the General Administration
Department to ensure that the meetings of the Council of Ministers which is the most crucial
apex decision making and coordinating body are conducted at periodic intervals in such a way as
to maximize its role and effectiveness. This would necessitate very careful scheduling of its
meetings and appropriate organization of its work schedule and agenda of every meeting
arranged in order of importance, relative priority, urgency and complexities; arrangements to
scrutinize the notes for Council of Ministers for comprehensiveness and compliance with
procedural formalities strictly in accordance with the Business Rules, and legal conformity with
statutes, the law and procedure, completion of requirements as to consultations with departments
in the same sector, with departments outside the sector and the coordinating departments for
conformity with the overall policy frame of Government and fiscal, plan and personnel
framework; and compilation of approved notes relating to all subjects and their circulation so as
to facilitate enough time for study by the members of the Council before the scheduled meeting
to enable meaningful discussion and informed decision. The Business Rules provide the
framework for enabling this. However, this is in need of substantial revision in keeping with the
changing role and perspectives of governance and practices relating to conduct of business in
other Governments. What has been done so far is only adhoc changes carried out from time to
time to meet exigencies of situations as and when they have arisen and not to undertake a
comprehensive revision to enable meaningful, expeditious, informed conduct of decision making
in Government and efficient, effective, economic and ethical implementation in the field.

Reforming Business Processes

A number of areas present themselves in this regard. First and foremost it is possible to
substantially reduce the number of proposals requiring approval of Cabinet which could be
delegated to the individual ministries or empowered committees authorized for purpose
comprising ministers or secretaries or both, or the Chief Minister. Secondly, subjects could be
categorized in such a way as to institute the system of scrutiny of complex issues by a standing
cabinet committee before consideration of the Council and the decision thereon. This enables
reconciliation of outstanding issues and within the cabinet committee, consultation with experts
outside Government, association of stakeholders, private sector and civil society bodies where
necessary to receive feedback on alternate possibilities, implications and likely impacts of the
policy by the cabinet committee and quicker and more informed decision in the Cabinet with
better focused alternatives and assessment of implications and impact. Thirdly, subjects could be
listed which could be delegated to the lower levels or approved pending ratification by the
Council. Fourthly, in order to facilitate meaningful decision, it should be mandatory not to
discuss any subject without notice at a meeting, except in special circumstances that to with the
prior approval of the Chief Minister. Lastly, it should also be made compulsory to give a notice

111
of at least three days except in emergencies for discussion on any subject waving the notice upon
being permitted by the Chief Minister.

Similarly, there is a lot of scope for reduction of number of files going to the Chief Minister and
the Chief Secretary for approval. The Business Rules contain general stipulations relating to the
categories of cases requiring approval of the Chief Minister. Such stipulations are also contained
in other statutory provisions and instructions as well, examples being provisions in the service
rules, financial and other codes. In order to reduce the routine workload of the Chief Minister, it
would be essential to review the provisions of the Business Rules and other statutory provisions
and Executive instructions which can be taken up as a part of examining the reduction of number
of files requiring approval of Cabinet and delegation of such powers to empowered committees,
the Chief Minister and the Minister concerned as the case may be having regard to the relative
importance. This exercise can also include a reexamination of the classes of cases which require
to go through the Chief Secretary to the Chief Minister as well so that both the Chief Minister
and the Chief Secretary are in a position to concentrate more on strategic policy, reforms and
high level coordination and decisions in important matters.

Elsewhere the deteriorating quality of drafting of legislations, rules, agreements and orders
having legal implications in the departments in general and the Law Department in particular,
quality of legal advice, the mounting caseload against Government and the proliferation of
outdated laws, rules and procedures have been referred to. There is need for improving the legal
knowledge and drafting ability of the departments including the Law Department with particular
reference to legislative work. Apart from improving the quality of personnel in the Law
Department in order to enhance the overall legal acumen and drafting ability of the departments,
internal legal advisers appointment has been suggested in each department. This should be
supplemented by exposing the departmental officers to courses conducted at regular intervals in
fundamentals of law and basics of drafting of orders and rules. In order to strengthen capacity in
Law Department itself, the law officers should be compulsorily subjected to training in the law
ministry which has provided for such facility to state legal department officers. There could also
be a special diploma course in drafting organized through the NALSAR.

A detailed examination has already been made to the need for delegation of Legal, Civil Service,
Finance and Planning functions from the coordinating departments to the administrative
departments which also reduce the need for coordination. Similar examination has to be done of
the role of devolution in simplifying the structure of Government and flattening the levels of
decision making. One of the recommendations which has been widely endorsed is the need to
have departments with integrated functions, unlike at present, enjoying greater financial,
administrative, human resource and legal functions and powers with integrated financial, legal
advisors in each department; while simultaneously giving freedom to departments to operate
their budgets and control, direct and supervise their personnel. Within each department also, the
need for flattening of levels from the minister to the secretary and from the secretariat to the
heads of departments and from heads of departments to the lower field formations has also been
dealt with at length starting with delegations under Rule 22 and 23 of the Business Rules by the
minister to the lower levels.

112
Communicating Policy

Enhancement of capacity for communicating policy in Government to the public requires:

1. Capacity to anticipate public reaction and modulate the communication of policy duly
taking note of the likely reaction;
2. A strong link with the media to facilitate communication through the appropriate
medium;
3. A up to date targeted distribution lists for transmission of information to all concerned
without fail; and
4. Comprehensive arrangement for monitoring the media for commence on Government
policy and impact of implementation of policy, whereas there are information officers
attached to every ministry at the Centre, there is no such arrangement in the State
Government departments which is a noticeable lacuna.

Coordination Mechanisms

Reduction of the levels of decision making and flattening of the hierarchy for the purpose
contributes to better coordination and quicker decision making. Higher the decision making
level and lesser the delegation of powers, greater the need for coherence and coordination.
Coordination in Government involves internal coordination within Government and coordination
with the external world i.e. agencies outside Government involving other wings of the State i.e.,
the legislative coordination, inter Governmental coordination and with local authorities, the
private sector and the third sector including the citizens at large. Internal coordination within
Government would involve:

a) Political coordination; and

b) Administrative coordination

The highest political coordinating structure in Government is the Council of Ministers followed
by Cabinet committees.

Internal administrative coordination would in turn involve:

a) Horizontal coordination; and

b) Vertical coordination within each department.

Horizontal coordination on the part of a department may be:

a) Where there is more than one secretary within the same department, there would be need
for coordination among the sub departments under different secretaries in the same
department unless one of the secretaries is specifically designated as the head of the
entire department with supervisory role over other secretaries (in which case it would
become internal vertical coordination);
b) With sister departments in the same sector;

113
 c) With other departments with which it has functional linkages;
d) With the coordinating departments viz., Law and Legislature, Personnel and General
Administration, Finance, Planning and ICT; and also
e) Those affecting the whole of Government.

The coordinating structures may be:

a) Consultative or advisory; and

b) Decision making or empowered structures.

Internal vertical coordination would be mainly within each department of secretariat and with its
field agencies.

External coordination will involve the private sector, the academic community, the civil society
and the citizens at large. This would be mainly informative, consultative or participatory in
nature. Consultative or participatory involvement of the second and the third sector could be for
purposes of consultation in the course of the legislative or rule making process, pre budget
consultations, to ascertain views on draft policies which the Government intends to adopt, to
obtain feedback on implementation of policy, through surveys to ascertain citizens preferences
or views. Examples of civil society participation include advocacy, oversight involving
accountability of Government; and participation in plans, programmes and policies of
Government. Responsive Governance Initiatives seek to emphasize the increasing need to
associate and seek the participation of these sectors in the task of governance. Public private
partnership in implementation of projects or programmes is a component of responsive
governance.

In the light of foregoing there is need to create mechanisms for external and internal coordination
at different levels for both types of coordination which could take the form of committees for
consultation or advise or empowered committees for decisions; where powers are not delegated
to the departments and their agencies in their turn. Adhoc approach to coordination leads to
repetitive consultations and loss of precious time in attending and conducting meetings convened
on adhoc basis at all levels. The political coordination could be more effectively achieved by
having standing cabinet committees for specific sectors as at the Centre including empowered
committees for taking decisions subject to or without the need for ratification and group of
ministers for specific issues of a consultative nature particularly involving consultation with the
second and the third sector. External coordination with the second and the third sector could be
achieved through mechanisms like Governance Advisory Councils, Economic Advisory Council,
State Planning Board and Planning Committees at the district and for metropolitan levels in the
State as contemplated in the 73rd and 74th amendment. There is no institutionalized arrangement
as yet for consultations with the civil society organizations in the State. A State level committee
for this purpose on the lines of the State and district level committees for institutional finance
would be a welcome step in order to enable interaction with the third sector. At the departmental
level also there should be external consultative committees for each department like Industrial
Advisory Council comprising industry representatives, Trade and Taxation Advisory Council,
Environmental Advisory Councils and the like. Special advisors to Government advising the
Chief Minister as in the case of the Centre (like Scientific Advisors) supply a crucial omission of

114
technical expertise in Government requiring competence of a specialist nature. Adhoc
commissions like the Administrative Reforms Commission, Law Commission, etc at periodic
intervals to modernize and update governance process and Government framework are another
source of specialized policy advice which the administrative machinery is inherently not in a
position to provide. Social audit mechanisms involving the civil society and the citizens is a new
area made prominent by responsive governance initiatives.

Internal coordination is presently very adhoc in nature. Even the existing mechanisms like the
Secretaries Committee and the services sub-committee of secretaries chaired by the Chief
Secretary have become unwieldy or infrequent and adhoc. Having regard to the extraordinary
increase in the number of secretaries, it is necessary to revise the composition of secretaries
committees. Except in stray cases there are no standing empowered committees of secretaries as
in the Centre. This is one instrument which Government profitably think of in order to flatten
structures. The progressive increase in the number of secretaries in individual departments has
also contributed to coordination issues for which there is no standing arrangement which is
essential. First of all there should be standing sectoral coordination committees for each sector
under sectoral coordinators like Agricultural Production Commissioner and other Commissioners
as proposed for other sectors comprising secretaries of departments coming within that sector.
Secondly, departments having more than one secretary should be brought under the senior most
officer within the department or there should be a departmental secretaries committee within the
department which meets at regular intervals to discuss and decide issues of mutual interest.
Similar need arises for standing vertical coordination committees within each department
comprising the heads of departments and the Chief Executives of field organizations.
Coordination committees for plan schemes and departmental promotion committees of
secretaries already exist. Similar functional committees like tender committees could be
constituted on a permanent basis. In ensuring such coordination the Business Rules assign a
special status to secretaries to Government. They monitor whole of Government work that is
why they are designated by the Rules as secretaries to Government and not as secretary to
minister.

Monitoring and Evaluation

Feedback on and monitoring and evaluation of decisions, policies, programmes and service
delivery are essential tools to test the output, outcome, quality, efficiency, effectiveness and
equity of the policy and implementation and ethical conduct of personnel in the conduct of
business of Government. The present status of monitoring in the Council of Ministers is mostly
confined to technical compliance of action taken on the decision of the Cabinet i.e. whether
action that should follow the decision has been taken within the specified or intended period and
does not extend to the outcome and impact of these decisions and policies and quality of
implementation and nature of conduct of business. There are certain programmes which are
monitored closely by the Council relating to those which are assigned top priority in their policy
agenda. Some of the international lending institutions have begun insisting on the monitoring of
the implementation of the programmes taken up with their assistance to ensure effective and
timely implementation. Governance initiatives and public sector reform measures are subjects
which have to be closely monitored at regular intervals in the Council of Ministers in so far as
the natural tendency is to resist any change on the part of the bureaucracy. In order to break this

115
highest political commitment should be in evidence which can come only in the nature of special
monitoring at the level of the Chief Minister and the Council of Ministers. Otherwise like many
new initiatives taken up in the past with much fanfare, they would remain mere publicity stunts
and would fail to produce any real impact in modernizing the system and changing the way
Government does its business. It is possible to evolve a list of important items which are to be
monitored in the Cabinet at regular intervals. A word of caution in this context would relate to
the need to avoid excessive monitoring which could be counter productive and may result in
fudging figures to show progress and to avoid being hauled up over the coals for non
performance.

Programme evaluation and monitoring is an integrated part of the planning process and ought to
form an important wing in the Planning Department in charge of the annual plans and the
medium term plans. It is a matter of regret to go on record that today hardly any scientific
evaluation of programmes in the field is being done. Finance Department has been undertaking
preparation of performance budget for a number of years. These have also become in course of
time mere paper documents which are virtual copies of earlier years performance budgets with
mechanical correction of figures and without any real performance evaluation. Similar has been
the experience with the introduction of the innovation of zero based budgeting. These initiatives
have virtually become fads in departments like fashion which keeps changing every season
without becoming a successful style which endures for long.

Monitoring and evaluation have to be taken by individual departments and the controlling
departments like the Finance, Planning and General Administration Departments including the
Council of Ministers to be serious business to which requisite time is to be devoted. Apart from
normal reporting of progress of expenditure or implementation of policy or programme, regular
departmental evaluation at requisite intervals by the department and by the controlling
department as the case may be should be undertaken which should be preceded of course by a
rigorous monitoring by the Head of the Department or the Chief Executive whose primary
responsibility is implementation. Recent innovation to undertake top level evaluation of
performance of Heads of Departments and Secretaries to Government through a system of
computerized monitoring at the highest level was looked upon with great hostility. It is true that
evaluation parameters and techniques have to be different for different types of activities. But
that is no reason why monitoring itself should be frowned upon and looked upon with suspicion.
In respect of priority policies and vital programmes there should be special evaluation through
sponsored studies undertaken by specialized institutions. Governance reforms emphasize social
audit as an effective means of monitoring which has to be more progressively and widely
resorted to. A technique recently popularized by the Public Affairs Centre of Bangalore and
which has become a worldwide best practice is the report card method of assessing service
delivery. This technique could also be profitably employed from time to time to assess quality of
service delivery in Government.

Evaluation and monitoring enable mid course correction of decisions, policies and programmes
based on public feedback and expert assessment of the output and the outcome of the programme
which enables further refinement of the policy or programme in the light of experience gained in
implementation or execution of the policy or the programme.

116
References
UN Studies

1) Public Sector Reform Revisited in the Context of Globalization, Guide Bertucci and Yelande
Jenrial, July 2000, U N DESA.
2) MDGD - Civil Service Reforms Paper, UNDP

OECD Reports / Studies

3) A Comparative Analysis of Government Offices in OECD Countries Simon James and

Michael Ben Gera, August 2004 GOV/PGCMPM/RD (2004) 1
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
4) Coordination at the Centre of Government : The Functions and Organization of the
Government Office Comparative Analysis of OECD Countries and Western Balkan Countries,
Michael Ben Gera, March 2004, Sigma Paper No 35 2004, GOV / SIGMA (2004) 2
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
5) Initiatives of Government of India on Regulatory Reform Nikhilesh Jha, 1998
CCNM / EMEF / PUMA / RD (1998) 1
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
6) Public Sector Modernization : Changing Organization Structures Policy Brief
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

University of Manchester Papers

7) Can Flawed Models of Public Management be Exported? Issues and Practices, Martin
Minogue, IDPM, University of Manchester, February 2000.
8) Measuring Public Sector Capacity, Charles Polidyno, IDPM, University of Manchester
9) New Public Management in Developing Countries, Charles Polidyno, IDPM, University of
Manchester
IDPM Public Policy and Management, Working Paper No 13, November 1999

Others

10) Learning to Compete : Improving the Public Service in Developing Asia, Dr Clay
Westcott, 1999
11) Machinery of Government Reform : Principles and Practice, Nuffield, Oxford, UK.
12) Pieces of the Puzzle : Machinery of Government and the Quality of Policy Advice, Sally
Washington, June 1998, Working Paper No 4, State Services Commission, Government of New
Zealand.
13) The Constitution of India
14) The Andhra Pradesh Business Rules and Secretariat Instructions

117
Reports of Committees / Studies

15) Report of the Economy Committee, 1950 A D Gorwala, Hyderabad

16) Report of the Administrative Reforms Commission, 1960 K M Unnithan, Hyderabad
17) Report of the Administrative Reforms Commission, 1964-1965 Ramchandra Reddy,
Hyderabad
18) Working of the Secretariat and Heads of Departments, 1964 Study M R Pai and G Ram
Reddy
19) Committee on Measures for Toning up Administration, 1975 K B Lal
20) Secretariat and Heads of Departments in Andhra Pradesh A Study 1983 G Ram Reddy and
G Haragopal (commissioned by State ARC, 1982-83)
21) Report of M K Rustomji and Associates on Administrative Reforms, 1986, Hyderabad
22) Committee to Review Administrative Reforms, 1990 S R Rammurthy, Hyderabad
23) Report of the Maharashtra Administrative Reforms Committee, 2001-02
24) Report of the Assam Administrative Reforms Commission, 2005
25) Economic Growth and Poverty Alleviation in Tamil Nadu A Study, The World Bank

Websites

Websites of the UNDP, the World Bank, the Government of UK, the Government of India, the
State Governments of Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Tamil Nadu

118