Relevance: GS-2: Functions and responsibilities of the Union and the States, issues and challenges pertaining to the federal structure.

Key Phrases: DIG-level IPS officers, Empanelment, Police Establishment Board, Central deputation, Vacancies, Cadre management.

Why in News?

• Close on the heels of the Centre sending a proposal to states to amend All India Service Rules regarding central deputation of any IAS, IPS or IFoS officer, the government has issued another order on DIG-level IPS officers that may not be palatable to the states.

Key Points:

• In an order issued on February 10, the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) has said that IPS officers coming to the Centre at DIG level would no longer be required to be empanelled at that level with the Union Government.
• According to existing rules, a DIG-ranked IPS officer with a minimum experience of 14 years could only be deputed to the Centre if the Police Establishment Board empanelled them as DIGs at the Centre.
  • The board chooses the panel on the basis of officers’ career and vigilance records.
  • Only Superintendent of Police-level officers do not require empanelment at the Centre.
• The new order makes the entire pool of DIG-level officers in a state eligible for central deputation.
• The move is aimed at increasing the pool of DIG-level IPS officers for central deputation in the backdrop of massive vacancies in central police organisations (CPOs) and the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs).

Need:

• According to data sourced from various CPOs and CAPFs, out of 252 posts reserved for IPS officers at DIG level at the Centre, 118 (almost half) are vacant. IPS officers have a quota of 40% in CPOs and CAPFs.
  • The Centre had in November 2019 written to states proposing to decrease this quota by 50%, saying more than 60% posts remain vacant since most states do not spare their officers.
• The idea behind the move is to ease up the process of central deputation as verification of records takes a long time.
  • As the number of DIGs is high, the empanelment process had become cumbersome and it was taking as long as a year.
• Moreover, it increases the size of the pool of officers available to the Centre.

Issues:

• Reading this with the recent proposal on deputation of IAS, IPS and IFoS officers, the new order may be seen by many states as the Centre’s attempt at pushing the envelope further on increasing its powers over officers serving in the states.
• Also, there is little evidence of a waiver of empanelment conditions having an impact on vacancies at the Centre.
  • For example, there is no requirement of empanelment for SP level posts, yet the vacancies are close to 50%.

• Moreover, there is a serious paucity of officers in the states too.
  • In a cost-cutting move during the Atal Bihari Vajpayee regime, the size of IPS batches among other government staff was reduced even though sizeable vacancies existed even then.
  • From 80-90 officers each, IPS batches were cut to 35-40 officers (in 1999-2002, the average was 36).
  • The average attrition rate of IPS officers due to superannuation is 85 per year.
• This comes when the number of districts in some states doubled in a decade or so, the availability of officers was one third.
• Add to this the already existing vacancies in sanctioned strength of IPS cadre.
  • According to the MHA, as on January 1, 2020, there were 908 vacancies against a sanctioned strength of 4,982.

Impact:

The anomaly in IPS recruitment adversely affected cadre management over the years.

• At some levels, there are fewer officers than sanctioned posts, while at others there is a glut.
  • On one hand, states are not providing enough DIGs or SPs to the Centre, while on the other, the Centre does not have enough posts if the total cadre reserve of IPS is calculated.
  • For example, Uttar Pradesh has a shortage of DIGs and IGs, but too many officers at the level of ADGs.
• Then while states should ideally promote batches or parts of it according to the vacancies available, political interests often lead to promotion of entire batches to please a certain section, in effect slamming doors on promotional avenues for those below them.
• CAPF officers, themselves facing career stagnation, have been demanding removal of the DIG-level quota for IPS officers as they are unwilling to join, so that force cadre officers can instead fill these posts.

Way Forward:

• Steps have been taken to fill the vacancies in IPS cadre.
  • During the UPA regime, the government began intake of IPS batches as large as 150.
  • As a result, while in 2009, there were more than 1,600 vacancies, against a sanctioned strength of over 4,000 IPS officers, in 2020 there were 908 vacancies against a sanctioned strength of 4,982.
  • The government has continued to increase the size of batches with the 2020 Civil Services Exams taking in 200 IPS officers.
• Moreover, to allay states fears, officers would still have to be put on the offer list for central deputation which is decided by the states and the Centre in consultation.
  • Also, states would have to be willing to relieve them.
• Experts say that by 2025, states may have surplus officers at DIG level to spare for the Centre and, if Centre-state relations remain normal, the issue may be resolved.

Conclusion:

• The amendment has been brought in to ease the selection process and have more DIG-level IPS officers at the Centre. With rising number of DIGs, the empanelment process had become cumbersome. Hence, it was thought necessary to speed up the process. However, any such move needs to be taken keeping states in confidence.

Source: Indian Express

Proposed IAS Cadre Rules Amendments: Right or Wrong?

Mains Question:

Q. The opposition of states to the new rules of central deputation of officers points to a larger gap in Centre and State relations. In this light comment on the issues with federal structure in India and ways to improve it.