“Administrative reforms in India have been repeatedly suggested by committees but implementation has lagged. Discuss.”

Since independence, a number of committees have suggested changes to e-governance, citizen-centric administration, and public service accountability. These include the Santhanam Committee (1964), the 2nd ARC (2005–2009), and the Punchhi Commission (2010). Although they are clear, their application in real life has been uneven.

Lag causes include entrenched bureaucracy’s resistance because of concern for privilege loss.

hesitation on the part of politicians to enact measures that limit discretion.

implementation that is fragmented between states and ministries.

inadequate structures for monitoring and evaluation.

Crucial Aspects: The fundamental problem is that India’s administrative reforms continue to be supply-driven and committee-oriented rather than demand-driven and outcome-focused, which causes the gap between suggested practices and real-world implementations to grow.

Way Ahead:

 To ensure continuity across governments, reforms must be given top priority through political will and bipartisan consensus.

Implementation requires specialised oversight entities with unambiguous accountability for results.

Regular training, digital technologies, and public feedback channels should all be used to link bureaucratic capacity building with reform goals.

Participation from the media and civil society must be promoted in order to increase reform pressure and guarantee that suggestions are implemented rather than being lost in reports.

UPSC General Studies Paper Preparation

Public Administration Optional Exam Preparation