Indian Administrative Service

The Indian Administrative Service (IAS) is the administrative arm of the All India Services of Government of India. The IAS is one of the three All India Services along with the Indian Police Service and Indian Forest Service. Members of these three services serve the Government of India as well as the individual states. IAS officers are also deployed to various government constitutional bodies, staff and line agencies, auxiliary bodies, public sector undertakings, regulatory bodies, statutory bodies and autonomous bodies.
As with other countries following the parliamentary system of government, the IAS is a part of the permanent bureaucracy of the nation; and is an inseparable part of the executive of the Government of India. As such, the bureaucracy remains politically neutral and guarantees administrative continuity to the ruling party or coalition.
Upon confirmation of service, an IAS officer serves a probationary period as a sub-divisional magistrate. Completion of this probation is followed by an executive administrative role in a district as a district magistrate and collector which lasts several years. After this tenure, an officer may be promoted to head a whole state administrative division as a divisional commissioner.
On attaining the higher scales of the pay matrix, IAS officers may lead government departments or ministries. In these roles, IAS officers represent the country at international level in bilateral and multilateral negotiations. If serving on a deputation, they may be employed in International organization such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Asian Development Bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, or the United Nations, or its agencies. IAS officers are also involved in conducting elections in India as mandated by the Election Commission of India.
During the East India Company period, the civil services were classified into three – covenanted, uncovenanted and special civil services. The covenanted civil service, or the Honourable East India Company's Civil Service (HEICCS), as it was called, largely comprised civil servants occupying the senior posts in the government. The uncovenanted civil service was introduced solely to facilitate the entry of Indians onto the lower rung of the administration. The special service comprised specialised departments, such as the Indian Forest Service, the Imperial Police and the Indian Political Department, whose ranks were drawn from either the covenanted civil service or the Indian Army. The Imperial Police included many Indian Army officers among its members, although after 1893 an annual exam was used to select its officers. In 1858 the HEICCS was replaced by the Indian Civil Service (ICS), which became the highest civil service in India between 1858 and 1947. The last appointments to the ICS were made in 1942.
With the passing of the Government of India Act 1919 by the Parliament of the United Kingdom, the Indian civil services—under the general oversight of the Secretary of State for India—were split into two arms, the All India Services and the Central Services. The Indian Civil Service was one of the ten All India Services.
In 1946 at the Premier's Conference, the Central Cabinet decided to form the Indian Administrative Service, based on the Indian Civil Service; and the Indian Police Service, based on the Imperial Police.
When India was partitioned following the departure of the British in 1947, the Indian Civil Service was divided between the new dominions of India and Pakistan. The Indian remnant of the ICS was named the Indian Administrative Service, while the Pakistan remnant was named the District Management Group (later renamed to Pakistan Administrative Service in 2012). The modern Indian Administrative Service was created under Article 312(2) in part XIV of the Constitution of India, and the All India Services Act, 1951.
A special cadre was created in 1954 to administer NEFA (present day Arunachal Pradesh) and for later Some North Eastern Region. It was first mooted by then Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru. The services were placed under Ministry of External Affairs.
In 1968, IFAS was merged with IAS and has hence lost its relevance.
There are three modes of recruitment into the Indian Administrative Service. IAS officers may enter the IAS by passing the Civil Services Examination, which is conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC). Officers recruited this way are called direct recruits or regular recruits (RR). Some IAS officers are also recruited from the state civil services, and, in rare cases, selected from non-state civil service. The ratio between direct recruits and promotees is fixed at 2:1. All IAS officers, regardless of the mode of entry, are appointed by the President of India.
Only about 180 candidates out of over 1 million applicants, who apply through CSE, are successful, a success rate of less than 0.02 per cent.
Unlike candidates appointed to other civil services, a successful IAS candidate is rendered ineligible to retake CSE. From 1951 to 1978, an IAS/IFS candidate was required to submit two additional papers along with three optional papers (instead of just the three optional papers like for other civil services) to be eligible for the Indian Administrative Service or the Indian Foreign Service. The two additional papers were postgraduate level submissions, compared to the graduate level of the optional papers, and it was this distinction that resulted in a higher status for the IAS and IFS. The two postgraduate level submissions were later removed, but this has not changed the perceived higher status of the IAS and IFS. After the selection process, the successful candidates undergo training at the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration in Mussoorie, Uttarakhand.
The central government announced a new cadre allocation policy for the All India Services in August 2017, claiming it as being a policy to ensure national integration of the bureaucracy and to ensure an All India character of the services. The existing twenty six cadres were to be divided into five zones by the Department of Personnel and Training. Under the new policy, a candidate first selects their zones of preference, in descending order, then indicates a cadre preference from each preferred zone. The candidate indicates their second cadre preference for every preferred zone subsequently. The preference for the zones and cadres remains in the same order and no change is permitted.
Officers remain in their allocated cadre or are deputed to the Government of India.
Until 2008, there was no formal system that permitted the selection of a state cadre preferred by the candidate. If the candidate was not placed in a vacancy in their home state, they would be allocated to other states, which were selected from a roster in alphabetic order, starting from 'a', 'h', 'm' or 't', depending on the year. For example, if in a particular year the roster begins from 'a', then the first candidate on the roster will go to the Andhra Pradesh state cadre, the next one to Bihar, and then to Chhattisgarh, Gujarat and so on in alphabetical order. The next year the roster starts from 'h', for either Haryana or Himachal Pradesh (the two states alternate roster years). This system, practised since the mid-1980s, ensured that officers from different states were placed all over India.
The system of permanent state cadres resulted in wide disparities of professional exposure for officers when comparing those from developed versus less developed states. Changes in state cadres were only permitted on grounds of marriage to an All India Services officer of another state cadre or under other exceptional circumstances. The officers were allowed to go to their home state cadre on deputation for a limited period after which they would be required to return to their allocated cadre.
From 2008, IAS officers were assigned to state cadres at the beginning of their service. There was one cadre for each Indian state, except for two joint cadres: Assam–Meghalaya and Arunachal Pradesh–Goa–Mizoram–Union Territories (AGMUT). The "insider-outsider ratio" (ratio of officers who were posted to their home states to those from other states) was maintained at 1:2, with one-third of the direct recruits being 'insiders' from the same state. The rest were posted as outsiders according to the state allocation roster in states other than their home states, as indicated by their preference.
The typical functions performed by an IAS officer are:
At the beginning of their career, IAS officers receive district training with their home cadres followed by their first posting. Their initial role is as an assistant collector cum sub-divisional magistrate and they are placed in charge of a district sub-division. As assistant collector cum sub divisional magistrate, they are entrusted with maintaining law and order, as well as general administration and development work, of the sub-district.
Completion of probation is followed by an executive role in a district as a district collector cum district magistrate, which lasts several years. After this tenure as a district magistrate or district collector or deputy commissioner, IAS officers can be posted to various positions in the state government. These positions include secretary or principal secretary in different departments, director of a department, divisional commissioner, or chairman of a government corporation. The specific positions depend on the officer's seniority, experience, and performance. The highest positions that an IAS officer can attain include chief secretary of a state or cabinet secretary of the country.
In 2015 it was announced that a new designation of assistant secretary at the Central Secretariat had been created to enable new IAS officers to be posted to Delhi for a three-month assignment as part of their training regime. IAS officers were previously only permitted to go on a deputation once assigned to the Central Secretariat after nine years of service in their home cadre. It was observed that the experience of central functions was severely lacking among these deputations, resulting in this change in their training. As part of the new system, IAS assistant secretaries are supposed to work on projects—a new policy in their respective areas—and present it to their respective ministries; of all projects, 36 are selected to be presented before all secretaries of the Government of India; consequently, 16 are selected to be before the Cabinet Secretary and a final eight are selected for presentation before the Prime Minister.
As an IAS officer progresses in their career, they become eligible for important positions in the central government. These positions include joint secretary, additional secretary, and secretary in different ministries and departments. In these roles, IAS officers are involved in making policies, implementing them, and making important decisions at the national level. They can also be appointed as advisors to the central government or serve in autonomous bodies, commissions, and international organizations. These opportunities allow IAS officers to contribute to the development and governance of the country on a larger scale.
On attaining the apex scale, IAS officers may lead government departments or ministries. In these roles, IAS officers represent the country at the international level in bilateral and multilateral negotiations. If serving on a deputation, they may be employed in International organization such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Asian Development Bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, and the United Nations or its agencies. IAS officers are also involved in the conduct of elections in India as mandated by the Election Commission of India.
Upon retirement, high ranking IAS officers have occupied constitutional posts such as the Chief Election Commissioner of India, the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, and the chairperson of the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC). They have also become members of administrative tribunals, such as the National Green Tribunal and the Central Administrative Tribunal, as well as chiefs of regulators including the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, the Securities and Exchange Board of India, and the Reserve Bank of India. If a serving IAS officer is appointed to a constitutional post such as Comptroller and Auditor General of India, Chief Election Commissioner of India or chairperson of UPSC or as head of a statutory authority, such as the National Commission for Women or the Central Information Commission, he or she is deemed to have retired from service.
IAS officers can also be deputed to private organisations for a fixed tenure under Rule 6(2)(ii) of the Indian Administrative Service (Cadre) Rules, 1954.
The performance of IAS officers is assessed through a performance appraisal report (PAR). These are governed through the All India Services (Performance Appraisal Report) Rules 2007. The reports are reviewed to judge the suitability of an officer before a promotion or a posting in the union or state governments. The report is compiled annually and is initiated by the officers themselves, designated as the reporting officer, who list their achievements, completion of assigned activities and targets for the year. The report is then modified and commented on by the reviewing officer, usually the superior of the reporting officer. All the Reports are forwarded by the reviewing officer to the accepting authority, who conducts a final review of the report.
In popular perception, the allure of pursuing a career in the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) lies in the associated privileges and benefits, which drive hundreds of thousands of candidates to compete for a limited number of positions each year. The position of an IAS officer is commonly regarded as a gateway to power, privilege, and elevated social status. Criticisms of the country's bureaucracy have persisted over time, with detractors highlighting its cumbersome nature, slow decision-making processes, inefficiency, and instances of corruption. These deficiencies have become so widely acknowledged that the Indian bureaucracy often becomes the subject of relentless satirical portrayals in popular culture.
It was reported in 2017 that there is a shortage of about 1,700 IAS officers in the country. Despite this, the government has stated that annual recruitment of IAS officers will not increase, to avoid impacting the career progression of existing officers and the overall structure of the service.
Critics argue that the IAS lacks adequate mechanisms for holding bureaucrats accountable for their actions. This can lead to a culture of impunity and inefficiency, as civil servants may not face consequences for poor performance or misconduct. Critics argue that bureaucracy can lead to a lack of accountability as unelected bureaucrats hold significant decision-making power. They argue that bureaucrats, who are not directly accountable to the public through elections, can wield significant influence over policies and implementation without facing direct consequences for their actions.
The IAS is a highly centralized bureaucracy, with decision-making power concentrated at the higher levels of the hierarchy. This centralized structure can impede decentralization efforts and limit the involvement of lower-level administrators and local stakeholders in decision-making processes.
The bureaucratic culture within the IAS can sometimes lead to resistance to change and a reluctance to adopt new ideas or reforms. This can hinder innovation and prevent the adoption of best practices, making it challenging to address emerging challenges effectively.
Media personalities, some retired IAS officers and a few academics have argued in favour of lateral entry into the IAS to inject fresh blood into the service. They argue that it would help refresh the bureaucracy, offer competitiveness and bring in alternate perspectives. A counter-argument has been put forward that a lateral entry process could be manipulated due to corruption and cronyism. It is further argued that lateral entry would not lead to improvements in managerial performance or accountability, and while it may create synergy between the government and big businesses, it could also compromise the integrity of government. It has also been argued that it could weaken the bureaucracy instead. The union government has frequently ruled out lateral entry into the IAS.
Several think tanks and media outlets have argued that the IAS is hamstrung by political influence within the service. It has been reported that many local political leaders have been seen to have interfered with IAS officers. Politicians have also exerted pressure on IAS officers by repeatedly transferring them, suspending them, beating them, and, in some extreme cases, killing them.
While hearing T. S. R. Subramanian v. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India ruled that IAS officers – and other civil servants – were not required to act on oral instructions given by politicians as they 'undermined credibility'.
Several academic papers have shown IAS to be a significant contributor to crony capitalism in India. In 2015, it was reported by the Government of India that a hundred IAS officers had come under scrutiny by the Central Bureau of Investigation for alleged corruption. In 2017 Government records showed that 379 IAS officers had deliberately failed to submit details of their immovable assets (IPR). Since 2007, a number of chief secretaries and a principal secretary have been arrested in cases of graft or money laundering. IAS officers have been found amassing disproportionate assets and wealth varying from ₹200 crore (equivalent to ₹235 crore or US$27 million in 2023), to ₹800 crore (equivalent to ₹942 crore or US$110 million in 2023). In 2016 it was reported that the Government would provide the means to prosecute corrupt IAS officers, with the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions agreeing to receive requests from private citizens seeking punitive measures against IAS officers even without supporting documentation.
In 2017, a Central Bureau of Investigation special court in Delhi sentenced a former Union Coal Secretary and two other IAS officers to two years in prison for their involvement in the coal allocation scam.
In 2017 it was reported by the Department of Personnel and Training, part of the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, that, since 2014, one IAS officer was prematurely retired from service, ten IAS officers had been deemed to have resigned, five had their pensions cut, and a further eight IAS officers suffered a cut in remuneration.
In 2018 the Union Minister of State for Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Jitendra Singh, informed the Lok Sabha that disciplinary proceedings were underway against 36 IAS officers. In 2020, Central Bureau of Investigation arrested two district magistrates in connection with an illegal arms license distribution scandal in the then Jammu & Kashmir state.
During year 2020–21, 581 corruption charges were filed against IAS officers. Further, a total of 753 complaints were received against the IAS officers in 2019-20 and 643 in 2018–19.
Former IAS officer and RBI Governor, D. Subbarao said 25% IAS officers are corrupt, incompetent or inefficient; middle 50% started well but have become complacent and only 25% are truly delivering, while discussing his book with the media platforms.
In June 2015, The Telegraph reported that twelve IAS officers had gone missing, and had not reported to either the union or the state government for their allocated cadre. It was believed that they were working in foreign countries for companies such as Microsoft for more lucrative pay. The Asian Age later reported that the services of three of the twelve officers were likely to be terminated due to "prolonged absence from service".
Several IAS officers have been accused of misuse of reservation by means of submitting fraudulent documents and certificates, especially for disability or caste. This has led to their dismissal or suspension, even jail time for fraud. This has denied fair opportunities to capable candidates from general category.
UPSC files case against Puja Khedkar for fraud, moves to cancel candidature. In September 2024, Puja Khedkar, an IAS officer of Maharashtra cadre from the 2023 batch, was dismissed and arrested, after she was found to have submitted fraudulent caste and disability documents and certificates. The Union Public Service Commission stated that Khedkar was guilty of acting in contravention of the provisions of the Civil Services Examination-2022 Rules, and that Khedkar allegedly demanded special privileges such as a separate office, house, car, and staff, which she was not entitled to as a probationary officer.