IRPS History

Till 1924, there was no separate organization on the Railways to deal with the staff matters. Hence, Executive Officers had to deal with their own staff. However, the factors such as:-

1. the construction of new lines,
2. amalgamation of one or two Railway Administration, taken over from the Railway Companies,
3. the gradual increase in traffic, with its unending technical and operating problems and
4. the increase in the number of staff employed after 1924, led to increase in the size of the state-managed Railways. Hence, a need felt for the re-organisation of the work. This need was met by the introduction of Divisional Organisation. The need to set up separate organisation for dealing exclusively with staff matters in Divisions, whereby freeing the executive officers to devote their full attention to operating and maintenance problems was also felt. Accordingly, a start, to have a separate organization for dealing with staff matters in the Headquarters Office, was made on the Government managed Railways after 1924.

Early in 1946, the Railway Board decided that, on account of great increase in the volume and complexity of labour and establishment work on the Indian Railways, a distinct Railway Service should be established, with its own cadre, to be known as 'Establishment Department' of the 'Superior Revenue Establishment' of the State Railways. It was also decided that direct recruitment to Class I Service to these Departments should be made by the competitive examination through the 'Federal Public Service Commission(i.e. predecessor of UPSC). A decision to create this new department was put in Railway Board's Resolution No. E.-45-RR-5 dated 30.4.1946. The rules, for recruitment to the Department, were put as Annexure to that Resolution. In pursuance of this decision, 17 candidates were recruited through Central Services Examination held in 1945 and 1947.

Mr. Ramaswamy Kannan of 1945 batch was the first officer to be recruited into the 'Establishment department'.

The question of direct recruitment to Establishment cadre was re-examined in 1949. Although the volume and complexities of work, which necessitated the formation of this Department, had not decreased, the Railway Board decided to do away with the direct recruitment of officers for this department.

The Railway Board -

1. felt that a few persons who specialized only in the establishment rules, without having intimate knowledge of day to day working of various Departments or active contact with the staff are less suitable to deal with the work than the officers who are directly and intimately in touch with the working conditions of the staff.
2. felt that some of these establishment officers with no executive responsibility were getting too detached from the actual conditions of working on Railways.
3. apprehended that by confirming these officers solely in the Establishment Department, their avenues of promotion might be rather restricted as compared to other officers recruited on the basis of the same examination and appointed in other Departments on the Railways and this might lead to a certain amount of frustration.

In view of these considerations, the Railway Board decided that direct recruitment to the "Establishment Department" should be stopped and the 'Union Public Service Commission' were advised accordingly in August, 1949.
The recommendations made by the Indian Railway Inquiry Committee that "where the personnel work had not been centralized, no attempt should be made to do so", had also probably influenced the abandonment of the scheme to have a separate Establishment Service.

Item 141 of the conclusion and recommendation of the Indian Railway Enquiry Committee reads as under :

• Where personnel work has not been centralized, no attempt need be made to do so. We recommend that on Railways run on a departmental system, each Head of Department may have a small office, dealing with personnel matters. On Districts it is not necessary to have a Personnel officer, except on the longer ones, where an Assistant Officer might be provided to work under Divisional Officer. On Railways, run on a Divisional system, the concentration on personnel work in headquarters office will be needed. On Divisions, it will be advantageous to have a small unit advising the Divisional Superintendents in personnel matters, and in dealing with appeals which lie to him. Apart from that, the Personnel work should be done by the various Divisional Officers.

The Committee discussed the reasons for and against the separate Personnel Branch. They stated as follows :-

• In the course of evidence tendered before us it has been suggested that owing to the growing complication of the Establishment Code and the increase in the number of references arising form greater consciousness on the part of the staff, Personnel work has increased to such an extent as to make it desirable to create a separate Personnel Branch which will involve a greater degree of centralized control. The advantages claimed in favour of such an arrangement are that it would relieve the executive officers of the burden of attending to the routine part of personnel work, such as, leave applications, issue of passes, etc., and at the same time create a small body of specialists who would be thoroughly conversant with personnel work and would be able to deal with all such matters more expeditiously than an overworked and harassed executive officers.
• There is, however, also a different point of view represented before us, which was probably in many ways stronger. Evidence showed that such centralization of personnel work would take away from the officers a valuable opportunity of helping their man and keeping in touch with them. It is these small matters, such as the sanction of leave, issue of passes, etc., that bring the executive officer into normal human contact with his men. It has also been suggested that the work connected with the Personnel Branch is after all not quite as technical or difficult as has been represented at times. District officers have in the past been able to cope with such matters and could do so in the future as well.
• This recommendation was under consideration of the Government. It finally recorded in October, 1950, that the recommendation had been noted and that the view of the Committee would be taken into account while deciding the question of internal organisaiton of each railway unit as a result of regrouping of Railways.
• Therefore, aforementioned developments led to the retrogressive step of disbanding the newly born Establishment service.

Sixteen direct recruit Establishment Department officers of 1945 and 1947 batch and three other officers(two 1946 batch war service officers plus one officer who was inducted directly into the Establishment Service)-total 19 Establishment officers- were given an option, in 1956, to get absorbed into other departments viz Accounts, Traffic,Mechanical Engg. etc. Except two, everybody opted to get absorbed.

One of the most illustrious officer was Sardar Avtar Singh Rikhi (of famous Rikhi Commission on Education) of 1945 batch. He, subsequently, switched over to the newly formed Indian Parliamentary Cadre and retired as Secretary General to the Indian Parliament.

Another illustrious officer, of 1947 batch, was Shri A.V. Subramanian. He opted,in 1956, to join IRAS. After the formation of IRPS in 1970s, he was the first officer to join the IRPS. He finally retired, in 1982,as AGM of Southern Railway. He is now a noted author and has written many books. He developed an original theory of aesthetics based on neurology.The prime interest and guiding force of his life has been the pursuit of Sanskrit and Tamil literature. He has written over forty books which have established him as a highly original writer, commanding an unusually bright and interesting style of presentation. He has been invited to deliver endowment lectures by Indian Universities and scholarly bodies.His short bio-data can be read here.

One of the officers of 1947 batch, Shri TV Madhav refused to give any option or join any service. Like a typical Tamilian intellectual, he questioned the wisdom of the Board's prerogative to change the cadre midway,on option basis. He said that since he was appointed to IRSES by the President of India, hence his service condition and cadre cannot be changed without his consent. The Board had no option but to continue him as an Establishment department Officer.However, for promotion and seniority etc. he was tagged with the IRSME cadre.On the formation of the IRPS in 1970s, he was inducted into the new service, and he served as ACPO/CPO of NE Rly. He is credited with codification of the selection procedure in Railway. He finally retired as Adviser/IR in early 1980s.

Another noted officer was Shri Inder Sahai, who joined IRTS and retired as Principal of RSC/BRC, under whom the first batch IRPS officer had taken training in 1981. He was so disillusioned with Railway Board's attitude towards Establishment service that in his opening address to probationers, he advised them to leave the IRPS, as soon as possible, as there was no 'future' in IRPS.

The question whether a separate Service for Personnel work should be formed or not was still continued to be considered, in detail, for a long time from 1956 to 1960. The views of the General Managers of the respective Railways were obtained. The argument, for and against seconding of officers from other Departments to Establishment Cadre are as follows :-

1. In favour of the seconded officer :
   1. A seconded officer has an intimate knowledge of working conditions of staff in at least one Branch of Railway activity and familiarity with conditions in others.
   2. He would have acquired a capacity to keep in touch with men in their day-to-day work and acquires experience in handling them. This would enable him to bear on Personnel matters a sympathetic and realistic outlook.
   3. A spell of personnel work might help him, on promotion to administrative posts like Divisions Superintendents, and
   4. A wider field for choosing personnel officers becomes available.
   
   
2. Against the seconded officers :
   1. The officer lacks detailed knowledge of rules and regulations, labour legislation, etc.
   2. The technical Branch is always reluctant to spare a really good officer. It might also happen that the officer himself might be unwilling to be drafted into personnel branch as he might lose touch with this technical work.
   3. It is not possible to draft a technical officer except in Senior Scale as it has been the experience that younger officers prefer to learn work in their own Departments. This would result in a Divisional Personnel Officer being posted without the requisite knowledge or experience, and
   4. By the time the officer becomes will conversant with his work, he has to be transferred back lest he should be out of touch with his technical work.

The matter was discussed at the full Board meeting on 8.11.60 and it was finally decided that the officers of the Personnel Department may continue to be seconded from other cadre and not to be recruited directly through the Union Public Service Commission as Personnel Officers.

Hence, the result was there was no regularly constituted Service for the Personnel Department. The Class I posts in the Personnel Department were being allocated to the cadre of the Indian Railway Service of Engineers, Indian Railway Service of Mechanical Engineers, Indian Railway Traffic Service and Indian Railway Accounts Service for purposes of cadre check. Since there was no separate Service, there was also no direct recruitment of Personnel Officers. Posts in the Personnel Department were being manned by officers drawn from the four Railway Services referred to above.

The first Administrative Reforms Commission, under Chairmanship of Shri K Hanumanthaiya, in its Report on the machinery of the Government of India and its Procedure of Work made the following recommendations : -

• 17(i)- A separate Department of Personnel should be set up with a full Secretary-in-Charge who should work under the general guidance of Cabinet Secretary.
• 17(v)- The new Department of Personnel should be placed directly under the Prime Minister.

These recommendations were accepted and implemented and a separate Personnel Department under the Cabinet Secretariat was formed.(i.e. prdecessor of the present Ministry of Personnel & Training)

There was, however, no such recommendation of the 'Administrative Reform Commission' so far as the Personnel Department on the Railways are concerned.However, the Study Team on Railways made the following recommendations,on 26.11.1968:-

• Special care should be taken in respect of recruitment and training of personnel officers. The personnel branch on railways should be placed on a footing similar to other major Departments of the Railways. Personnel Officers should not be changed frequently.
• The study team consisted of Dr.H.N. Kunzru as Chairman, and Shri P.C.Bhattacharya,Shri G.Pande, Shri K.B.Mathur,Shri P.L.Tandon and Shri G.P.Warrier as Members.

During the Budget debates in the Lok Sabha on 20th March, 1972, the Minister for Railways(Shri K Hanumanthaiya, who was earlier chairman of the first ARC) conceded to the suggestions made that there must be a separate cadre for Personnel Department and he mentioned as under -

• Some Hon. Members made a suggestion that in order to cope with the modern management techniques, there must by a separate cadre for Personnel management. My Hon'ble Friend, the labour leader, Shri A.P. Sharma, made that point. I propose to concede that point and begin the implementation of the idea he has sponsored.
• These were the words which,ultimately, led to the creation of the IRPS.
• Shri A.P. Sharma, the labour leader, was the MP from Buxar, Bihar. He was a Ticket Collector, who, later on, rose to become the Minister of Railway.

By mid-1970s,the total staff strength on the Indian Railways had already increased significantly and the strength was around 14 lakhs. The total strength of staff in different Divisions ranged from 15,000 to 40,000 and in Workshops from 1,000 to 14,000. Personnel work had increased, both in volume and in complexity. Personnel administration and Management had already become a specialized discipline, necessitating new skills and techniques of administration. This was particularly so in the Railways, where there are numerous problems in dealing with labour. The Ministry of Railways , therefore, found it necessary to reconsider the earlier decision. It was of the view that a separate Class I Service should be established to deal with Personnel matters. The officers of this new Service was to remain in the Service permanently and handle establishment work throughout their career. They were to be given specialized training in labour and management. The new Class I Service, which was to be known as the 'Indian Railway Personnel Service', was to include all the Class I posts existing at that time for personnel work. There was no changes in the hierarchical set-up or scales of pay, except to the extent decided upon by Government as a result of the recommendations of the Third Pay Commission. Some adjustments was, however, to be made in the total number of posts as a result of proposals, under consideration for restructuring of gazetted cadres.

At the initial constitution of the Service, it was proposed to fill the posts by officers drawn from other Services. For the future maintenance of the Service, it was proposed to provide for induction of a proportion of experienced officers from various Departments of Railways as well as from direct recruitment and promotion.

Initially, it was formed by inducting

1. Officers (of 1945 and 1947 Batch ,recruited by Federal Public Service Commission) of erstwhile Establishment Department of the "Superior Revenue Establishment" of the State Railways / Indian Railways,
2. Promotee Group 'A' officers of the Personnel Department,
3. Officers from other Departments, found suitable for service in Personnel Department,and
4. Officers of other Group 'A' service/Temporary Assistant Officers (unclassified) opting to come over to the newly constituted Service.

Later on, the 'Union Public Service Commission' started conducting direct recruitment(as an Allied Service) of the IRPS officers w.e.f. 1980 Civil Services exam. At present, IRPS is staffed by Direct Recruit Officers(through Civil Services Competitive Exam. held by UPSC), as well as by officers who are promoted to Group 'A', from the feeder rank of Group 'B' Personnel Officers of the Indian Railways.

As the initial batches of directly recruited IRPS Officers started to occupy the posts of CPOs which were held by officers of other services till that point of time, the cadre of IRPS started assuming the true nature of organised Group-A service. A visible pattern of Welfarism has taken a new order of Staff Engagement during this phase with no occurrence of strikes or industrial unrest of any nature.

With directly recruited IRPS officers attaining the apex level posts of DG/MS, and comprehensive cadre restructuring, the IRPS cadre has taken a full circle of completeness. The IRPS has been attaining new heights by expanding the horizon of staff welfare and happiness with innovative mechanisms of service delivery and driving the technology led transformation.