Spoils systemitch

Aghast at the form of spoils-system haunting the public service commissions, the Supreme Court observed in one such case concerning the Bihar government: “The Public Service Commissions which have been given the status of constitutional authorities and which are supposed to be totally independent and impartial while discharging their function in terms of Article 320 have become victims of spoil[s] system” (Upendra Narayan Singh, 2009 ).

Little did one realise that the warning of the Supreme Court would not be taken seriously by political parties. The result was that the 11 appointments made by the State Governor to the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission were set aside by the Madras High Court; further, the Supreme Court refused to stay the order.

Does this mean that a lawyer with a political background can never be appointed by the party which comes to power? The issue here is not concerning the political background. The Supreme Court has held that political faith cannot be an inhibiting factor, even for appointment to government services. It said: “We think it offends the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution to deny employment to an individual because of his past political affinities, unless such affinities are considered likely to affect the integrity and efficiency of the individuals service. To hold otherwise would be to introduce ‘McCarthysim’ into India. ‘McCarthyism’ is obnoxious to the whole philosophy of our Constitution. We do not want it.” (Ramashankar Raghuvanshi, 1983. )

In sum and substance, while McCarthyism is unacceptable, so is the system of spoils-sharing. Will parties in power wake up to the ground realities and abide by the fundamental duty in the matter of appointments so as “to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement”?

Justice K. Chandru is a former judge of the Madras High Court.