Bihar Chief Secretary orders pro-people shake-up in state bueaucracy

In what can be described as a move to sensitise top government officials to the needs of common people, Bihar Chief Secretary Pratyaya Amrit (IAS:1991:BR) has written to all Additional Chief Secretaries, Principal Secretaries of departments, senior police officials, and every District Magistrate (DM) and Superintendent of Police (SP), directing them to prioritise what the government describes as “ease of living” for the common people of the state.

The reason behind writing these letters is explained by him when he writes about how several instances came to his notice where people approached government offices with their problems, but the concerned officials were not to be found, causing unnecessary hardship to common people.

This is a pathetic reality for a state like Bihar, which has been highlighted by the Chief Secretary. In a way, he has acknowledged the widening gap between promises made and the delay caused in their delivery and wishes to bridge that gap. The directive asks officers to have two fixed days every week—Monday and Friday—when officials from panchayat offices to district headquarters and state-level departments must be physically present to meet the public. They have to hear complaints patiently, record them formally, and resolve them. If an officer is absent due to unavoidable reasons, an authorised substitute must step in.

Offices have to ensure basic amenities like drinking water, seating, and toilets for visitors. The directive also asks for registers to be maintained, reviews conducted, and compliance enforced.

The idea behind this move is to control officers so that subordinates comply. According to the directive, departmental heads have to regularly review grievance disposal. Senior secretaries have been asked to monitor not only whether complaints are received but also whether they are resolved in time. In bureaucratic terms, availability and responsiveness have been reframed as administrative duties rather than personal virtues, but it remains to be seen how successfully these reforms are enforced in a state known for bureaucratic inertia.