India has two government institutions that function with remarkable efficiency, clearly outperforming rest of the government: the Indian Army and Indian Railways (IR). Both carry a legacy steeped in history, romance and discipline, much of which is owed to the leadership of a distinguished cadre of officers. While the prestige of IR executive may not always match the allure of some All India and Central services in terms of social standing and candidate preference, its officers have long held a deep sense of pride in their organization. Sadly, this once-bright sheen of IR seems to be fading.

A recent news item reported that four years after the IR Management Service (IRMS) was introduced—intended as a merger of eight railway services into a single civil service to eliminate departmentalism—the initiative’s ill-effects were becoming evident, and the government was now reconsidering the policy for recruiting executives.

Having written extensively on the subject before, criticizing the flaws in the new scheme, I had resigned myself to the notion that IRMS was a done deal, set in stone, and so I held my peace.

The background

Briefly, a bit of background. The need for a solution to the age-old problem of acute departmentalism and fragmented working in silos among the IR cadres cannot be overstated. Back in 2017/18, during various workshops and discussions with the then Railway Minister, I and some other senior officers argued strongly for a unified cadre at the top level, despite opposition from many of our colleagues.

After some mulling and procrastination, , introduction of IRMS was heralded with much fanfare, but the initial excitement soon gave way to inaction. Then came a sudden push from the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), leading to a series of announcements and rollbacks. The current version of IRMS emerged—a half-baked misstep that undermined the very goals it set out to achieve.

The key issue is that while top management continues to enjoy their departmental silos, new executives are now inducted through a unified service via the Civil Services Examination. However, career progression still remains largely confined to respective cadres until Level 17 (Board Member), while Level 16 (General Manager) positions were already open to all departments. The attempt at unification has resulted in a cockeyed system, hastily implemented without proper thought given to integrating trainee officers into the active service while falling way short of any breakage of departmental silos in top positions; entrenched departmentalism would remain for decades in future as there is no strategy to move the existing middle and senior management out of their departmental comfort zones.

Key problems

1. Non-engineers in technical roles: It is hard to imagine non-engineers managing technical departments at the ground level in the railways but that is the new reality. On the other hand, if there is an attempt to exclude them, the whole point of unification is lost.

2. Confusing oversight for new recruits: Since they do not belong to any discipline, would General Managers oversee their postings and transfers? This makes no sense in practice.

3. Absurdly short tenures at Level 16: Some officers are posted in Level 16 positions for ludicrously short periods, in some cases just a single day. The way appointments are handled reeks of favoritism. Officers are being appointed as GMs without any cross-departmental experience, like working as a Divisional Railway Manager (DRM).

4. Loss of prestige: The biggest casualty has been the loss of prestige and pride, both for engineers and non-engineers. IRMS is now among the least popular services in the All India and Central Services. The engineering service used to be a top choice, but now it’s no longer available. Out of 150 intended candidates, only 90 joined, a majority of whom are on leave, hoping to reattempt the exam. This leaves only a disillusioned few to carry forward the vision for Indian Railways. Can this uninspired group, devoid of pride and passion, truly lead IR into the future?

While on hand the reform has failed to deliver a leaner bureaucracy or reduce departmentalism, it has led to a crippling shortage of officers at lower level, exacerbated by the lack of recruitment over the past three years.

Forty probationers from the first IRMS batch have raised concerns in representations to the Railway Board, fearing a government backtrack that could split IRMS back into technical and non-technical streams. In their identically-worded letters, they argued that such a move would go against the reform initiated by the Prime Minister and undo the vision of a unified service capable of meeting the aspirations of a 21st-century India. While one must sympathize with the probationers caught in this uncertain situation, separating into technical and non-technical wings might still be a better solution than the current IRMS structure although even then, it would be treating the symptom, not the disease.

Rumours abound that the Ministry is considering scrapping IRMS, convinced that the officers they’re getting through this system are largely generalists, unfit for core engineering operations. There’s talk of reverting to the old system of recruiting engineers through the Indian Engineering Services exam, a decision that may once again land on the Prime Minister’s desk. If true, it’s a sudden realization—coming so quickly, of course!—and hardly a surprise that the buck is being passed up to the PMO.

The Ministry of Railways, as it so often does, seems to have leapt before looking. One can only hope the powers-that-be will recognize that there’s no shame in backtracking if the so-called solution turns out to be more damaging than the original problem.

The writer is Retd. GM/Indian Railways and Independent Consultant Leader of Vande Bharat project