Representational imageThe number of pending files in the Secretariat is believed to be about 1.5 lakhs. In addition, there would be about five lakh pending files if we take the case of the offices of directors and district and block Panchayats. All these files, also considering the families of those involved, are the source of dissatisfaction for about 30 lakh Keralites.
These files are often delayed to protect the interests of about 2000 officials in the Secretariat and their ratio promotion norms.
A solution would be the directorate system as being followed by the central government, which allows queries to be raised on a single electronic file. This is very different from the current system in which various officials at different ranks study the same file and raise queries on paper to communicate with each other. Using the electronic option can prevent the waste of time. Enforcing the system at all levels would also save a lot of time.
Creating a State Administrative Service, modelled on the IAS, would be another solution to expedite slow-moving files and procedures. Only when new ideas are presented by people in responsible positions does administration become effective.
In all major states, there is a senior generalist service. Officials in the service report to IAS officials and eventually get promoted to the IAS. Those positions that require specific managerial skills but non-specific technical expertise can be made part of this service. About 300 to 400 positions may be created, which would need the promulgation of new laws.
Non-classified files can be made available in an Internet archive after the relevant minister or officials has made a final decision on it. To expand RTI, a norm for publishing digital information can also be created. Under it, the status of all eligible files whose details have not been published within seven days, have to be published on a daily basis. If the contact details of the officer concerned is also published, people can directly contact these officials for solving their problems.
Perhaps a provision could also be made to allow the applicant to make a last argument before the department secretary marks a file as 'closed.' This would do away with the possible complaint on the part of the citizen that he or she was not considered when a final decision was made on a request.
We need the initiative to implement these suggestions. It would be nice if that file which suggests these changes is not trapped in red tape.
(The author is the secretary of the Ayush Department. The views are personal.)
