Former bureaucrats call Sanjeev Sanyal’s comments on the civil services exam “absurd.”

Sanjeev Sanyal’s comments regarding civil services exam preparation drew criticism from former officials, who described them as “absurd” and “avoidable.” Sanyal said that it is a waste of young energy to spend five to eight years studying for the exam. Critics counter that prospective civil officers make a substantial contribution to the development of the country. They stressed the role that organizations like the Indian Police Service (IPS) and Indian Administrative Service (IAS) play in the advancement of India. While some disagreed with Sanyal and suggested a cap on exam attempts, others defended the legitimacy and openness of the civil services examination procedure. All things considered, they think that getting ready for the civil services is a worthwhile investment in the advancement and governance of the country rather than a waste of time.

Former bureaucrats responded to Sanyal’s remarks, with many voicing displeasure. Retired IAS official G Sundaram called the comments “absurd” and stressed the significance of civil services to the development and unity of India. Sanyal’s claim was refuted by S K Sarkar, a former secretary of the Department of Personnel and Training, who asserted that candidates for the civil services are essential to the development of a country.

Another former bureaucrat, Sanjeev Chopra, disagreed with Sanyal’s viewpoints, saying it is improper to criticize young people who want to work as government servants. He underlined the importance of civil services in governance and societal development, as well as the diversity of professional goals held by individuals.

Retired Central Secretariat Service officer Kiran Puri underlined how important it is for intellectually gifted people to enter the civil services in order to advance the nation. She emphasized that the brightest brains must contribute to national advancement and governance.

Partially agreeing with Sanyal, former Chief Election Commissioner SY Quraishi acknowledged the lengthy time required to prepare for civil services examinations. To maintain examination fairness, he did, however, recommend a cap on the number of tries.

Pankaj Chaudhary, an IPS officer currently in service, refuted Sanyal’s comments, arguing that the civil services exam is transparent and credible. The speaker underscored the significance of civil services as an exemplar for young people and denounced Sanyal’s remarks as unjustified.

In conclusion, while views on Sanyal’s comments were divided, a large number of former bureaucrats disagreed, highlighting the significance of civil services in government and nation-building.