UPSC at 100: Harsh Mander on how Modi-era changes threaten India’s ‘steel frame’

As the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) turns 100, questions about its integrity and independence have grown sharper. Former IAS officer and activist Harsh Mander, a member of the Constitutional Conduct Group, reflects on the UPSC’s journey, its strengths, and how political interference threatens India’s once-trusted “steel frame".

How do you assess the UPSC at 100 — its strengths and weaknesses?

Until recently, the UPSC was among the few institutions people trusted for its integrity and fairness. Every year, around a million candidates appear for the civil services exam and only a handful make it through — perhaps the toughest ratio in the world. Despite that pressure, the UPSC has largely stayed free from corruption, unlike many state public service commissions.

Also Read: SC questions TN over acting DGP appointment, urges UPSC to act 'expeditiously'

But the way we select civil servants has deep flaws. The system rewards exam-taking ability more than moral courage, compassion, or integrity — qualities most essential for a public servant. The interview was once the only space to test for those values, but even that remains limited. The UPSC plays a massive role in shaping the character of the civil service, so it’s time we reimagined the entire recruitment process.

You mentioned recent events that raise questions about its independence. What do you mean?

We’ve seen a disturbing trend of key institutional heads resigning suddenly and without explanation. When such things happen at bodies like the UPSC, it naturally creates doubts about whether the commission is free from political interference.

What values did the civil service once stand for?

When we joined, we were taught that loyalty lies first with the Constitution, not with political masters. We serve the elected government, yes, but primarily we are servants of the Constitution — and of the most marginalised in our jurisdictions.

Also Read: Why is the IPS Association silent on the Anjana Krishna episode? | Capital Beat

That’s what the “steel frame” meant: an administrative backbone defending constitutional morality and protecting minorities and the poor.

Did that ethos shape your early years in service?

Very much. I joined the academy right after the Babri Masjid demolition, when secular and constitutional values were under severe strain. Our director and faculty believed that civil servants needed to be morally grounded and empathetic, especially during such times. That experience reinforced our duty to uphold secularism and justice for the poor.

What should the recruitment process actually test for?

We need a process that identifies moral courage, public compassion, and integrity, not just memory or speed. One idea could be to admit more candidates initially, send them for fieldwork in difficult regions, and then evaluate how they serve communities.

Also Read: Shakti Dubey tops civil services exam; top five comprise 3 women and 2 men

Only those who demonstrate constitutional values and commitment should move forward.

Are you worried about how governments shape appointments?

Yes. Over the past decade, the pattern of appointments shows a growing preference for people ideologically close to the ruling establishment. This undermines impartiality. Institutions like the UPSC and the Election Commission must be shielded from such capture if they are to retain public trust.

You’ve warned about a transformation of the civil services. What do you mean?

There’s a quiet remoulding underway. To push a majoritarian vision, you need a bureaucracy that’s compliant with it. That’s happening through selective appointments and the gradual promotion of officials who align with that political ideology. This is extremely dangerous for a democracy.

Mission Karmayogi was supposed to reform bureaucracy. Does it?

On paper, Mission Karmayogi aims to shift from “rule-based” to “role-based” governance — evaluating officials by competencies, not hierarchy.

Also Read: Puja Khedkar can't avail separate UPSC attempts as 'able' and 'disabled' candidate: SC

But the question is: competence for what? If it’s competence to uphold constitutional values, that’s good. But if it’s an arbitrary measure that lets the government pick and choose favourites, it will deepen politicisation instead of fixing it.

And lateral entry — what’s the danger there?

Bringing in outside experts isn’t a problem in itself. The problem is opaqueness. If lateral entry becomes a way to induct ideologically-aligned people into key posts, it’s deeply worrying. Transparency and independent selection are essential.

You’ve spoken about 'bulldozer justice'. How does that reflect on the service?

Bulldozer actions — demolishing homes right after communal incidents — show how far the executive has strayed from the Constitution. There’s a legal process for justice, but collective punishment through bulldozers is unconstitutional.

Also Read: Opposition cheers as Centre backpedals on UPSC lateral entry, but there is need for caution

What’s most disturbing is that so few district magistrates refuse to carry out such illegal orders. It shows how our recruitment and training failed to build moral courage.

What about rewriting of history and curricula?

Civil servants are expected to follow government policy, but their first loyalty must be to constitutional truth. When they become willing participants in rewriting history or promoting partisan narratives, they betray that duty.

How do we protect institutions like the UPSC?

We need transparent appointment processes and greater public scrutiny. Reports of these bodies should be debated in Parliament and examined by media and civil society. Protecting the UPSC means ensuring no government can unilaterally control who leads or serves within it.

What should this centenary moment be used for?

This is a time for introspection, not celebration alone. Civil society, academia, and the media should ask: has the UPSC upheld the vision Sardar Patel imagined? Have our civil servants defended the Constitution, or bent before power?

Also Read: UPSC U-turn | Modi 3.0 in no position to bulldoze decisions

The centenary should spark that national conversation.

And your immediate hope for reform?

Open up appointments, ensure transparency in lateral entry, and rethink training to prioritise constitutional values over exam endurance. If this centenary can make India reflect on what kind of civil servants we really need, it will be worth celebrating.

(The content above has been transcribed from video using a fine-tuned AI model. To ensure accuracy, quality, and editorial integrity, we employ a Human-In-The-Loop (HITL) process. While AI assists in creating the initial draft, our experienced editorial team carefully reviews, edits, and refines the content before publication. At The Federal, we combine the efficiency of AI with the expertise of human editors to deliver reliable and insightful journalism.)