Q.2 How All-India Services are different from state civil services? What are the implications of the proposed IAS rule changes?(10 Marks)

Comments

9 responses to “Q.2 How All-India Services are different from state civil services? What are the implications of the proposed IAS rule changes?(10 Marks)”

1. 

   February 9, 2022

   priyanka kumari

   Order Id #0000521272

   Log in to Reply
   1. 

      February 18, 2022

      Staff @CD

      Priyanka

      Introduction, first line is fine. After that, mention the new changes i.e. earlier consent used to be taken from state government as well as the officer concerned, when moving an officer from state to central deputation. This has been done away with, centre’s decision was final earlier too.
      Further, centre has stretched the rules so that it can pull any number of officers from the states.
      Differences mentioned after that are fine but you should try to mention Article 309 and 312.
      In implications, points about federalism, motivation of officers are good. However, also mention the practical implications such as
      states losing their key officers to mandatory central deputation;
      States may resort to altering their Transaction of Business Rules to divest IAS officers of key posts in the state, and vesting the same with the state officers;
      States may provide space for retired bureaucrats to re-enter administration as special appointees, outside the cadre rules.
      Conclusion is fine.
      Keep practicing. 🙂

      2.5/10
2. 

   February 9, 2022

   Karun Kumar Takhele

   ID-Ir1zuLIKkQ1gwr

   Log in to Reply
   1. 

      February 18, 2022

      Staff @CD

      Karun

      In intro, mention briefly what are the changes proposed, you are writing implications of the changes without mentioning the changes.
      You can just mention that earlier consent used to be taken from state government as well as the officer concerned, when moving an officer from state to central deputation. This has been done away with. Further, centre has stretched the rules so that it can pull any number of officers from the states.
      In differences, points are fine, last point can be avoided, try to mention article 309,312.
      Implications are fine, practical implications like States losing key officers; altering their Transaction of Business Rules to divest IAS officers of key posts in the state, and vesting the same with the state officers;
      providing space for retired bureaucrats to re-enter administration as special appointees, outside the cadre rules- can be mentioned.
      Way forward is fine, try to write a concluding statement.
      Keep practicing. 🙂

      2.5/10
3. 

   February 10, 2022

   Anoop Sharma

   Order Id #0000520807

   Log in to Reply
   1. 

      February 18, 2022

      Staff @CD

      Anoop

      Good attempt, you have broadly covered the important points. Understanding is good.
      Introduction is fine, other than unilateral decision-making, centre has stretched the rules so that it can pull any number of officers from the states. You can mention that.
      In implications, you have mentioned shortage of officers in states.
      Differences mentioned are good, nice that you have mentioned constitutional articles.
      Implications are also good, both practical and constitutional dimensions are mentioned.
      States may start providing space for retired bureaucrats to re-enter administration as special appointees, outside the cadre rules- this can be mentioned.
      Conclusion is good.
      Keep practicing.🙂

      5.5/10
4. 

   February 11, 2022

   Likhitha Patil

   0000513717
   Please review

   Log in to Reply
   1. 

      February 18, 2022

      Likhitha Patil

      *NOT CHECKED*
   2. 

      February 18, 2022

      Staff @CD

      Likhitha

      Intro, first para is fine. In differences, you can mention articles 309 and 312 of the constitution. Since differences are exclusively asked, it will be nice if you can make a table and mention 3-4 differences.
      Proposed amendments are good, however, you can mention that earlier consent used to be taken from state government as well as the officer concerned, when moving an officer from state to central deputation. This has been done away with, centre’s decision was final earlier too.
      Implications are fine, you can mention 1-2 positives also such as efficiency of administration at centre and tackling shortage of officers at centre. Then go for negatives, points mentioned by you are fine.
      Some immediate implications other than shortage of officers such as states altering their Transaction of Business Rules to divest IAS officers of key posts in the state, and vesting the same with the state officers;
      providing space for retired bureaucrats to re-enter administration as special appointees, outside the cadre rules- can be mentioned.
      Way forward and conclusion are good.
      Keep practicing. Read some other answers. 🙂