Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The adage “Wisdom lies in knowing what to reckon with and what to overlook” highlights the importance of prioritization and discerning judgment, qualities crucial for effective administration. In the complex landscape of public service, it is not uncommon to find officers fixated on peripheral issues, losing sight of core responsibilities. This tendency, often stemming from risk aversion or a desire for visible achievements, can significantly undermine the principles of justice, effective service delivery, and ultimately, good governance. The question probes whether such preoccupation constitutes a travesty of these fundamental tenets, demanding a critical evaluation of its consequences.
Impact on Justice and Service Delivery
When an administrator prioritizes non-essential tasks, it inevitably leads to a travesty of justice. Resources – time, manpower, and funds – are diverted from areas where they are most needed. For instance, an officer excessively focused on maintaining pristine office records might neglect addressing public grievances related to essential services like healthcare or education. This creates systemic delays and inequities, disproportionately affecting vulnerable populations.
Service delivery suffers directly. Consider a District Magistrate overly concerned with beautification projects while ignoring the deteriorating law and order situation. This misallocation of attention can lead to increased crime rates and a breakdown of public trust. The 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendment Acts (1992) aimed at decentralizing power and improving local governance, but their effectiveness is hampered when officials are preoccupied with superficial matters rather than empowering local bodies.
Impact on Good Governance
Good governance hinges on principles like accountability, transparency, and responsiveness. An administrator engrossed with the periphery often exhibits a lack of strategic vision and a failure to address systemic issues. This can foster a culture of inefficiency and corruption.
Lack of accountability: When core issues are ignored, it becomes difficult to hold officials accountable for poor performance. They can easily deflect criticism by pointing to their achievements in less significant areas.
Erosion of Transparency: Focusing on superficial aspects can be a tactic to avoid scrutiny of more complex and potentially problematic areas.
Reduced Responsiveness: A preoccupation with minor details hinders the ability of the administration to respond effectively to the evolving needs of the public.
Reasons for Preoccupation
Several factors contribute to this phenomenon:
- Risk Aversion: Administrators often shy away from tackling complex, politically sensitive issues for fear of repercussions. Focusing on easily manageable tasks provides a sense of control and minimizes the risk of failure.
- Performance Indicators: The emphasis on quantifiable performance indicators can incentivize officials to prioritize tasks that yield visible results, even if they are not the most important.
- Bureaucratic Inertia: Established procedures and a rigid hierarchical structure can stifle innovation and discourage officials from challenging the status quo.
- Political Interference: Excessive political interference can force administrators to prioritize tasks that serve political interests rather than public needs.
Example: The implementation of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) has often been hampered by officials focusing on maintaining records and ensuring compliance with procedural requirements, rather than ensuring that the scheme actually reaches the intended beneficiaries and provides meaningful employment. (Source: Multiple reports by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India)
| Issue | Consequence |
|---|---|
| Focus on Peripheral Issues | Delayed grievance redressal, inequitable service delivery |
| Risk Aversion | Neglect of complex, politically sensitive issues |
| Emphasis on Quantifiable Indicators | Prioritization of visible results over substantive impact |
Conclusion
In conclusion, the preoccupation of administrators with peripheral issues undoubtedly constitutes a travesty of justice and undermines effective service delivery and good governance. While acknowledging the pressures and constraints faced by civil servants, it is crucial to foster a culture of strategic thinking, accountability, and a commitment to addressing core challenges. Strengthening ethical frameworks, reforming performance evaluation systems, and promoting greater transparency are essential steps towards ensuring that administrators prioritize the needs of the public and uphold the principles of good governance. A holistic and citizen-centric approach, rather than a focus on superficial achievements, is paramount for realizing the full potential of the Indian bureaucracy.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.