1 CODE OF CONDUCT FOR

SARDAR VALLABHBHAI PATEL

PUBLIC SERVANTS

T HE DAYS of the Indian Civil Service of the old style are going to be over and in its place we
have brought into being the All India Administrative Service. The change is both significant
and epoch-making. In the first place, it is an unmistakable symptom of the transfer of power
which is taking place from foreign to Indian hands. Secondly, it marks the inauguration of the All
India Service officered entirely by Indians and subjected completely to Indian control. Thirdly,
the Service will now be free to or will have to adopt its true role of national service without
being trammeled by traditions and habits of the past.
I have dwelt on the significance of this change mainly in order to bring home to the minds
of the probationers particularly, and to the outside world incidentally, that the days when the
service could be masters were over and the officers must be guided by a real spirit of service
in their day-to-day administration, for in no other manner can they fit in the scheme of things.
Perhaps you are aware of a saying which is current in India regarding the past civil service,
which is known as the Indian Civil Service, that it is neither Indian, nor civil, nor imbued with
any spirit of service. In a true sense, it is not Indian because the Indian Civil Servants are mostly
anglicised, their training was in foreign lands and they had to serve foreign masters. Therefore, in
effect, the whole service was known not to be Indian, nor to be civil, nor imbued with any spirit
of service, and yet it was known as Indian Civil Service. The thing is now going to change.1
To some extent, all of you, who are undergoing instruction in this school, are more fortunate
than your predecessors. Your predecessors had to serve as agents of an alien rule and, even against
their better judgement, had sometimes to execute the biddings of their foreign employers. You
will now have the satisfaction that whatever you do, you will be doing under the orders of your
own fellow-Indians. Your predecessors were brought up in the traditions in which they felt out
of touch and kept themselves aloof from the common run of the people. It will be your bounden
duty to treat the common men in India as your own or to put it correctly, to feel yourself to be
one of them and amongst them, and you will have to learn not to despise or to disregard them.
In other words, you will have to adopt yourselves to democratic ways of administration.
1. Text of a speech delivered to the probationers at the All India Administrative Service Training School, Delhi in April, 1947.
Originally published in Bombay Chronicle, April 21, 1947. This extract was circulated at Civil Services Day function at Vigyan
Bhawan, New Delhi on April 21. 2007. Extract is taken from The Collected Works of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. Volume XII
(1 January 1947-31 December, 1947.
 4 Ethics, Integrity and Values in Public Service

Almost all of you have had service in the army and it should not, therefore, be necessary
for me to stress the need of discipline in your ranks in whatever capacity you may be serving
India. Along with discipline, you must cultivate an esprit de corps without which a Service
as such has little meaning. You should regard it as a proud privilege to belong to the Service,
covenants of which you will sign, and to uphold throughout your service its dignity, integrity
and incorruptibility.
You would do well to examine the conditions which prevail in India today. The real task in
India has just begun. For the time being there is a transition to the highest stature of independence.
The difficulties of a transitional period have, therefore, been superimposed over those of the
post-war problems. In these circumstances, we must expect—and we have a right to expect—
the best out of every civil servant in India, in whatever position of responsibility he or she may
be. It is not for you to approach your task purely from a mercenary angle or entirely from self-
interest, howsoever enlightened it may be. Your foremost consideration should be how best to
contribute to the well-being of India as a whole.
You can trust government to keep you contented and happy so that you may give your best,
but it would he unworthy of you if you make that a condition of service. After all, your ministers
fully appreciate and realise the importance of your work. They may sometimes appear to you
as lacking in sympathy, but I do not think there is anyone in the highest responsible positions in
India who does not feel that he must take the Service with him if he is to make the maximum
possible contribution to the well-being of India.
Above all I would advise you to maintain to the utmost the impartiality and incorruptibility
of administration. A civil servant cannot afford to, and must not, take part in politics. Nor must
he involve himself in communal wrangles. To depart from the path of rectitude in either of
these respects is to debase public service and to lower its dignity. Similarly, no service worth
the name can claim to exist if it does not have in view the achievement of the highest standard
of integrity. Unhappily, India today cannot boast of an incorruptible service, but I hope that
you who are now starting, as it were, a new generation of civil servants, will not be misled by
black sheep in the fold. But would render your service without fear or favour and without any
expectation of extraneous rewards.
You are the pioneers in the Indian Service, and the future of this service will depend much
upon the foundation and traditions that will be laid down by you, by your character and abilities
and by your spirit of service. You can look forward to your future with trust and confidence, and
if you serve in the true spirit of service, I am sure you will have your best reward. I shall ask
you, therefore, to devote yourselves to your studies, fully conscious of the responsibilities and
opportunities that await you and seek from what you hear instruction with an humble mind. I
wish all of you Godspeed.
 2 ETHICAL CONCERNS
RAMESH K ARORA IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

‘E THICS’ is a system of accepted beliefs, mores and values which control human behaviour.
More specifically, it is a system based on morals. Thus, ethics is the study of what is morally
right, and what is not. The Latin origin of the word ‘ethics’ is ethicus that means character. Since
the early seventeenth century, ‘ethics’ has been accepted as the “science of morals, the rules
of conduct, the science of human duty.” Hence, in common parlance, ethics is treated as moral
principles that govern a person’s or group’s behaviour. It includes both the science of the good
and the nature of the right.
The ethical concerns of governance have been underscored widely in Indian scriptures and
other treatises such as Ramayana, Mahabharata, Bhagvat Gita, Buddha Charita (Ashwa Ghosh),
Arthashastra, Panchatantra (Vishnu Sharma), Manusmriti, Kural (Thiru Valluvar), Shukra Niti,
Kadambari (Vana Bhatta), Rajat Rangani (Kalhan), and Hitopadesh (Narayan Pandit). One also
finds precious wisdom on governance in the Chinese texts by Lao Tsu, Confucious and Mencius.
In Western philosophy, there are three eminent schools of ethics. The first, inspired by
Aristotle, holds that virtues (such as justice, charity, and generosity) are dispositions to act in
ways that benefit the possessor of these virtues and the society of which he is a part. The second,
subscribed to mainly by Kant, makes the concept of duty central to morality: human beings are
bound, from knowledge of their duty as rational beings, to obey the categorical imperative to
respect other rational beings with whom they interact. The third is the utilitarian viewpoint that
asserts that the guiding principle of conduct should be the greatest happiness (or benefit) of the
greatest number (Hobson 2002 : 161–62). The Western thought is full of ethical guidelines to
rulers, whether in a monarchy or in a democracy. Such concerns are found in the writings of
Plato, Aristotle, Thomas Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Penn, John Stuart Mill, Edmund Burke,
Disraeli and others.1
The gist of wisdom on administrative ethics is that public administrators are the
“guardians” of the administrative state. Hence, they are expected to honour public trust and not
violate it. Two crucial questions raised in this context are “why guardian should be guarded?”
* Modified version of the paper originally presented at the National Consultation on Good Governance, organized
by Centre for Good Governance, HCM Rajasthan State Institute of Public Administration, Jaipur. A still earlier
version was used by IGNOU as reading material for MPA programme.
 6 Ethics, Integrity and Values in Public Service

and “who guards the guardian?” (Rosenbloom and Kravchuk 2004: 516). The administrators
need to be guarded against their tendency to misconceive public interest, promote self-interest,
indulge in corruption and cause subversion of national interest. And they need to be guarded by
external institutions such as the judiciary, legislature, political executive, media and civil society
organizations. These various modes of control become instruments of accountability.

ETHICAL CONCERNS IN ADMINISTRATIVE THEORY

It is essential to recognize that the discipline of Public Administration has been broadly influenced
in the initial stages of its growth by Political Science and the science of Management. While the
philosophical premises of Public Administration were influenced primarily by Political Science,
its technological dimension was impacted by Management Sciences. The early Political Science
was taught as Moral Philosophy and Political Economy, while its current curriculum is the product
of secular, empirical and “scientific” orientations of the past century. The American students of
Political Science, in the early years of the last century, were dismayed at the inadequacies of
the ethical approach in the Gilded Age. Their interaction with the German universities and by
virtue of the influence on their thinking by scholars such as JN Burgess, EJ James, AB Hart,
AL Lovell and FJ Goodnow sought to recreate Political Science as a true science. They became
increasingly interested in observing and analyzing “actual governments”. Natural and social
sciences substantially influenced their ideas and approaches. Later, Logical Positivism of the
Austrian School influenced scholars such as Herbert Simon and thereupon emerged a booming
faith in developing a Science of Politics and a Science of Administration that would be able
to “predict and control” political and administrative life (Sheeran 2006). As Dwight Waldo
commented, the old belief that good government was the government of moral men was thus
replaced by a morality that was irrelevant and that proper institutions and expert personnel
were the determining factors in shaping good government. “The new amorality became almost
a request for professional respect” (Waldo 1948 : 24-25).
The eminence of behaviouralism until the mid-1960s further marginalized the ethical issues
in the studies of Political Science and Public Administration. It was only after the advent of post-
behaviouralism in Political Science and the emergence of New Public Administration that the
scientific methods of behaviouralim and humanistic (read ‘ethical’) values struck a homogeneous
chord and the dispute between facts and values was resolved finally.
The current discipline of Public Administration accords importance to value of equity, justice,
humanism, human rights, gender equality and compassion. The movement of good governance,
initiated by the World Bank in 1992, lays stress, inter alia, on the ethical and moral conduct
of administrators. While the New Public Management movement is more concerned with
administrative effectiveness, the New Public Administration focuses on administrative ethics in its
broader manifestation. Both the movements are destined to co-exist. This is as much truer today
as it was a hundred years ago when the industrial world was experiencing the rise of Scientific
Management and amides a strong acceptance of the notion of administrative responsibility. John
Ethical Concerns in Public Administration 7

Kennedy, during his Presidency (1961–1963) had observed : “No responsibility of government
is more fundamental than the responsibility of maintaining the higher standards of ethical
behaviour.”

The Bureaucratic Theory

The ideal-type construction of bureaucracy, propounded by Max Weber, also highlighted an
ethical imperative of bureaucratic behaviour. Weber observed : “In the rational type it is a matter
of principle that the members of the administrative staff should be completely separated from
ownership of the means of production and administration. Officials, employees and workers
attached to the administrative staff do not themselves own the non-human means of production
and administration.... There exists, furthermore, in principle, complete separation of property
belonging to the organization, which is controlled within the sphere of office, and the personal
property of the official, which is available for his own private uses” (Weber 1947 : 331).
Weber’s analysis underscores the need to check the misuse of an official position for the
sake of personal gains. Although his ideal-type construct on bureaucracy is not “empirical” in
a methodological sense, yet it has an empirical flavour for it appears to have taken into account
the existential reality of bureaucratic behaviour in cross-national and cross-temporal contexts.
Although Weber was not normative while constructing his ideal-types, yet the messaged is clear
: Don’t misuse official property for personal benefit.
Most critics of real-world bureaucracies, including Harold Laski, Carl Friedrich, Victor
Thompson and Warren Bennis, have criticized bureaucrats for violating the prescribed norms
of moral conduct. Even Fred Riggs, while discussing the traits of a prismatic society like
“formalism” and “nepotism” points out the yawning gap existing between the “ideal” and the
“real” in the behaviour of administrators. The deviations from norms and mores are too glaring
to be ignored in such societies. Thus immoral behaviour has become an integral component of
“bureaupathology”.

THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT

Whether in a society or in a social sub-system, ethics evolves over a long period of time. It is
influenced, during its nurturance and growth by a variety of environmental factors. Administrative
ethics is no different. It is the product of several contextual structures and it never ceases to
transform. Let us look at some of the contextual factors that influence ethics in the public
administrative systems.

Historical Context
The history of a country marks a great influence on the ethical character of the governance
system. The spoils system in the USA during the initial phase of the American nation vitiated
the ethical milieu of American Public Administration. “To victor belong the spoils” asserted
 8 Ethics, Integrity and Values in Public Service

American President Jackson. Things would have continued the same way had not a disgruntled
job-seeker assassinated President Garfield in 1881. Garfield’s assassination triggered a process
of civil service reforms in the USA, and the setting up of the US Civil Commission in 1883 was
the first major step in that direction.
India has witnessed a long history of unethical practices in the governance system. Kautilya’s
Arthashastra mentions a variety of corrupt practices in which the administrators of those times
indulged themselves. The Mughal Empire and the Indian princely rule were also afflicted with
the corrupt practices of the courtiers and administrative functionaries, with bakshees being
one of accepted means of selling and buying favours. The East India Company too had a few
employees who were criticized for their corrupt behaviour even by the British parliamentarians.
The forces of probity and immorality have co-existed in almost all phases of human history.
Which forces are stronger depends upon the support they get from the prime actors of politico-
administrative system. What is disturbing is that continuation of unethical practices in governance
over a long period is likely to increase the tolerance level for administrative immorality.
In most developing nations having a colonial history, the chasm between the people and
the government continues to be wide. In the colonial era, the legitimacy of governance was not
accepted willingly by a majority of population and, therefore, true loyalty to the rulers was a
rare phenomenon. Although the distance between the governing elite and the citizens has been
reduced substantially in the transformed democratic regimes, yet affinity and trust between the
two has not been satisfactory even in the new dispensation. Unfortunately, even the ruling elite
do not seem to have imbibed the spirit of an emotional affinity with the citizens. The legacy of
competitive collaboration between the people and the administrators continues to perpetuate.
No wonder, this adversarial relationship has a negative impact on administrative ethics.

The Socio-cultural Context

The values permeating a social order determine the character of the governance system. Indian
society today seems to prefer wealth over any other value. And, in the process of generating
wealth, the means-ends relationship has been sidelined. Unfortunately, ends have gained
supremacy and the means do not command an equal respect. A quest for wealth is considered
a mark of civilizational progress.
We seem to be living in an economic or commercial society where unidimensional growth
of individuals is accepted and even valued, where ends have been subdued by means, and ideals
have been submerged under the weight of more practical concerns of economic progress. Can we
change this social order? Mahatma Gandhi wanted to transform the priorities of Indian society,
but there were hardly any other leaders who endorsed his radical thinking, essentially steeped
in a strong moral order. To put it bluntly, ever since Gandhiji passed away, there has been not a
single strong voice in independent India challenging the supremacy of Mammon. Neither our
family values have questioned this unlinear growth of human existence nor has our educational
Ethical Concerns in Public Administration 9

system made serious efforts to inject morality into the impressionable minds of our youth. We
have miserably failed on these fronts. The need is to develop fresh perspectives on what kind
of Indian men or women we wish to evolve and how? Till then, efforts will have to be focused
on the non-social fronts.
The issues of morality may or may not be rooted in the religious ethos of a society. Indian
religions and scriptures do not favour pursuit of wealth through foul means. Interestingly, Thiru
Valluvar’s Kural, written two thousand years ago in Tamil Nadu, emphasized that earning wealth
brought fame, respect and an opportunity to help and serve others, but he exhorted that it should
be earned through right means only.
The level of integrity among the Protestants and the Parsees is supposed to be relatively
higher when compared to other religions, and one can find the roots of such integrity in the
well-ingrained mores of these religions. Nevertheless, there are several secular groups as well
which are known for their high moral beliefs and conduct.
The cultural system of a country, including its religious orientation, appears to have played
a significant role in influencing the work ethics of its people. For instance, the stress on hard
work, so characteristic of the Protestant ethics, has helped several Christian societies to enhance
their per capita productivity. While Judaism has generally valued physical labour, the Hindu and
Islamic societies, on the other hand, have mostly considered physical labour at a plank lower
than the mental work.
The family and the educational system are influential instruments of socialization and
training of mind in its impressionable years. In case the values inculcated through the family
and the school underscore honesty and ethics, the impact on the mindset of citizens is likely to
be highly positive and powerful over a long time.

The Legal-judicial Context

The legal system of a country determines substantially the efficacy of the ethical concerns in
governance system. A neatly formulated law, with a clear stress on the norms of fair conduct and
honesty, is likely to distinguish chaff from grain in the ethical universe. Conversely, nebulous laws,
with confusing a definition of corruption and its explanations, will only promote immorality, for
these would not be able to instil the fear of God or fear of law among those violating the laws of
the land and mores of society. Besides, an efficient and effective judiciary with fast-track justice
system will prove a roadblock to morality in public affairs. Conversely, a slow-moving judiciary,
with a concern for letter rather than the spirit of the law, will dither and delay and even help
the perpetrators of crimes by giving them relief through prolonged trials and benefit of doubts.
Likewise, anti-corruption machinery of the government, with its tangled web of complex
procedures, unintended grants relief to the accused who are indirectly assisted by dilatory and
knotty procedures.
 10 Ethics, Integrity and Values in Public Service

In India, there is hardly any effective anti-corruption institution. The Lokpal has yet to be
established, most Lokayuktas are feeble and toothless institutions, while the state vigilance bodies
are low-key actors. The consequences are too obvious to warrant any explanation.

The Political Context

The political leadership, whether in power or outside, is perhaps the single most potent influence
on the mores and values of citizens. The rulers rule the minds of citizens, but in a democracy
particularly, political parties, pressure groups and the media also influence people’s orientation
and attitudes on moral questions. If politicians act as authentic examples of integrity, as happens
in the Scandinavian countries, or as examples of gross self-interest, as found in most South
Asian countries, the administrative system cannot remain immune to the high or low levels of
political morality surrounding it..
The election system in India is considered to be the biggest propeller to political corruption.
Spending millions on elections compels a candidate to reimburse his expenses through fair or
foul means — more foul than fair. While the fair means have limits, the foul have none.
It is generally argued that the administrative class — comprising civil servants at higher,
middle as well as lower levels — emerges from the society itself. Naturally, therefore, the mores,
values and behavioural patterns prevalent in society are likely to be reflected in the conduct of
administrators. To expect that administrators will be insulated from negative orientations and
norms evidenced in society, would be grossly unrealistic.
The above argument appears to have a convincing logic, yet there can be a counter-point
that the rulers are expected to possess stronger moral fiber than do the subjects. Since there are
hardly any instrumentalities to protect and nurture administrative morality vis-à-vis the general
social morality, such an expectation remains at the most an elusive ideal. Hence, there is an
obvious need to go deeper into the problem.
The behaviour of politicians has a demonstration effect on civil servants. Besides, the
capacity of the less honest political masters to influence the moral conductio civil servants is
immense. It is ironical that the moral environment in a country like India is designed more by its
politicians than by any other social group. The primacy of the political over the rest of systems
is too obvious to be ignored.
In case the media is objective and fearless, its role in preventing corruption can be
effective. It can even act as a catalyst to the promotion of ethical behaviour among administrators.
Hence, those who own and manage the media should value their wider social and moral
responsibility.

The Economic System

The level of economic development of a country is likely to register a positive correlation with
the level of ethics in the governance system. Even when a causal relation between the two is
Ethical Concerns in Public Administration 11

not envisaged, a correlation cannot be ruled out. A lower level of economic development, when
accompanied with inequalities in the economic order, is likely to create a chasm among social
classes and groups. The less privileged or more deprived sections of society may get tempted to
forsake principles of honest conduct while fulfilling their basic needs of existence and security.
Not that the rich will necessarily be more honest (though they can afford to be so), yet what
is apprehended is that the poor, while making a living, may find it a compelling necessity to
compromise with the principles of integrity.
It is interesting to note that with the advent of liberalizing economic regime in developing
nations, there is a growing concern for following the norms of integrity in industry, trade,
management and the governance system on account of the international pressures for higher level
of integrity in the WTO regime. This is what Fred Riggs would call ‘exogenous’ inducements
to administrative change.

FOCI AND CONCERNS

An important question arises in connection with the moral obligation of an administrative system.
Is the administrative system confined to acting morally in its own conduct or does it also share
the responsibility of protecting and promoting an ethical order in the larger society? While most
of the focus on administrative morality is on the aspect of probity within the administrative
system, there is need to consider the issue of responsibility of the governance system (of which
the administrative system is an integral part) to create and sustain an ethical ambience in the
socio-economic system that would nurture and protect basic moral values. Moral political
philosophy assumes that the rulers will not only be moral themselves but would also be the
guardians of morality. Truly, being moral is a prerequisite to being a guardian of wider morality.
It is a truism that the crux of administrative morality is ethical decision-making. The questions
of facts and values cannot be separated from ethical decision-making. Thus, the science of
administration gets integrated with the ethics of administration. And, in this integrated regime,
only that empirical concern is valued that respects the normative concerns in the delivery of
administrative services.
What are the essential concerns in regard to administrative ethics? There can be a long list
of values that are considered desirable in an administrative action. However, in being selective,
one has to focus on the most crucial values.
Let us then concentrate on the value of justice, fairness and objectivity. Woodrow Wilson,
the Princeton scholar who broached the issues of ethics in his seminal article “The Study of
Administration” (1887), when he became the US President and delivered his inaugural address
in 1913 averred that justice was more important than sympathy. Thus, he placed justice at the top
of the value hierarchy in a governance system. Paradoxically, there has been a lot of discussion
on the formal-legal aspects of administrative law since then, but very little analysis has been
made of the philosophical dimension of administrative justice.
 12 Ethics, Integrity and Values in Public Service

The other two issues of ethical decision-making, viz., fairness and objectivity, are in fact
integral components of administrative justice. When administrators are true to their profession,
they are expected to be impartial and fair and not be influenced by nepotism, favouritism and
greed while making decisions of governance. Objectivity should not be misconstrued just as a
mechanical and rigid adherence to laws and rules of decision-making. It has undoubtedly wider
ramifications encompassing a set of positive orientations.
Currently, the notion of ethics has expanded itself to involve all major realms of human
existence. Let us attempt to catalogue the salient aspects of ethics in public administration.
Broadly, these could be summarized as following maxims :
1. Maxim of Legality and Rationality: An administrator will follow the law and rules
that are framed to govern and guide policies and decisions.
2. Maxim of Responsibility and Accountability: An administrator would not hesitate to
accept responsibility for his decision and actions. He would hold himself morally
responsible for his actions and for the use of his discretion while making decisions.
Moreover, he would be willing to be held accountable to higher authorities of
governance and even to the people who are the ultimate beneficiaries of his decisions
and actions.
3. Maxim of Work Commitment: An administrator would be committed to his duties and
perform his work with involvement, intelligence and dexterity. As Swami Vivekanand
observed : “Every duty is holy and devotion to duty is the highest form of worship.”
This would also entail a respect for time, punctuality and fulfilment of promises made.
Work is considered not as a burden but as an opportunity to serve and constructively
contribute to society.
4. Maxim of Excellence: An administrator would ensure the highest standards of quality
and administrative decisions and actions and would not compromise with such
standards just because of convenience or complacency. In a competitive international
environment, an administrative system should faithfully adhere to the imperatives of
Total Quality Management (TQM).
5. Maxim of Fusion: An administrator would rationally bring about a fusion of individual,
organizational and social goals to help evolve a unison of ideals and imbibe in his
behaviour a commitment to such fusion. In situation of conflicting goals, a concern
for ethics should govern the choices made.
6. Maxim of Responsiveness and Resilience: An administrator would respond effectively
to the demands and challenges from the external as well as internal environment
of which the administrative system is a part. He would adapt to environmental
transformations and yet sustain the ethical norms of conduct. In situations of deviation
from the prescribed ethical norms, the administrative system would show resilience
and bounce back into the accepted ethical mould at the earliest opportunity.