Former cabinet secretary TSR Subramanian breathed his last Monday morning. The 79 year old was a 1961 batch Indian Administrative Service officer from the Uttar Pradesh cadre. Subramanian served in various capacities including his most important stint as the cabinet secretary from 1996 to 1998.

Tributes poured in for the former IAS officer from many including Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Calling TSR the tallest amongst IAS officers, the IAS association tweeted, “Extremely shocked to hear the sad news of the demise of TSR Subramanian. He was the tallest amongst all and is a big loss for the IAS fraternity and the nation.”

Extremely shocked to hear the sad news of the demise of T S R Subramanian. He was the tallest amongst all and is a big loss for the IAS fraternity and the nation. Deepest Condolences to all family members. We hope and pray that your ideas and thoughts will continue to guide us.

— IAS Association (@IASassociation) February 26, 2018

Prime Minister Narendra Modi tweeted, “”Shri TSR Subramanian distinguished himself as an outstanding civil servant. He also left a mark with his prolific writings and interventions on important public causes. Saddened by his demise. My thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends.”

Shri TSR Subramanian distinguished himself as an outstanding civil servant. He also left a mark with his prolific writings and interventions on important public causes. Saddened by his demise. My thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends: PM @narendramodi

— PMO India (@PMOIndia) February 26, 2018

Shocked to hear about the demise of TSR Subramanian, Former Cabinet Secretary and who gave important inputs for drafting New Education Policy. It is a big loss for the IAS fraternity and the nation. My condolences to his family members.

— Prakash Javadekar (@PrakashJavdekar) February 26, 2018

Saddened by the news of the demise of former Cabinet Secretary TSR Subramanyam. My condolences to the entire @IASassociation fraternity and his family.

— Dr Jitendra Singh (@DrJitendraSingh) February 26, 2018

Former President Pranab Mukherjee also conveyed his deepest condolences to Subramanian’s family and friends. “Saddened at the passing away of Shri TSR Subramanian, Former Cabinet Secretary. My deepest condolences to his family and friends,” the former president said.

TSR Subramanian (11 December 1938 – 26 February 2018)

Trivia: 

• TSR Subramanian’s full name is Thirumanilaiyur Sitapati Ramana Subramanian
• Born in 1938 into a middle class Tamil family in Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu.
• Subramanian pursued Master’s in Mathematics from Calcutta University then went to London to study at Imperial College.
• Also holds a Master’s degree in Public Administration from Harvard University
• He was a 1961 batch IAS officer from Uttar Pradesh Cadre
• His first posting as District Magistrate was in Ghazipur, U.P
• Served as the state’s Chief Secretary between 1992 and 1994 in between stints at the Centre
• In 1992, after the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, he was sent to U.P as Chief Secretary
• TSR was Cabinet Secretary from 1 August 1996 to 31 March 1998
• As Cabinet Secretary, Subramanian worked with three prime ministers — Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Inder Kumar Gujral and H D Deve Gowda.
• Also held the post of Secretary in the Ministry of Textiles when he was responsible for clearing Bt Cotton as Textiles Secretary– a decision which a few years ago he regretted
• Founder member and former Chancellor of the Shiv Nadar University
• Fought for bureaucrats against political interference. Subramanian was part of a group of bureaucrats and diplomats on whose petition the Supreme Court in 2013 had rolled out key civil services reforms
• Even after he retired as Cabinet Secretary in 1998, Subramanian remained active for bureaucrats’ cause
• He began as ‘ The Indian Express’ columnist in 2015
• After his retirement , he headed the TSR Committee for formulate new Education Policy which was presented to the NDA government in 2016, but was rejected
• Led a task force set up by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to leverage the post office network in the country to enhance the role of India Posts in the financial inclusion
• Subramanian penned three books on Indian polity and administration
• Was a prominent face on television debates. He spoke vociferously on matters related to the bureaucracy

Setting aside the Delhi High Court’s five-year-old order asking Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) to disclose the Prelims marks, the Supreme Court ruled that civil services examination marks cannot be revealed under the Right to Information Act (RTI). A bench of AK Goel and UU Lalit agreed to UPSC that the revelation of marks would compromise on the integrity of the UPSC civil services (Prelims) examination except for having a negative impact on the evaluation process.
“Weighing the need for transparency and accountability on the one hand and requirement of optimum use of fiscal resources and confidentiality of sensitive information on the other, we are of the view that information sought with regard to marks in Civil Services Exam cannot be directed to be furnished mechanically,” the bench said.

Underlining the UPSC’s difficulties in this regard such as disclosure could lead to “unnecessary resentment and revelation of the identity of evaluators and thereby putting the integrity of the examination in danger, the bench said, “Situation of exams of other academic bodies may stand on different footing. Furnishing raw marks will cause problems as pleaded by the UPSC which will not be in public interest.”

The UPSC, in its challenge to the Delhi High Court, said that the assurance of anonymity is one of the reasons they have been abler to get best teachers and scholars for the evaluation work.

“Once disclosure of answer books starts and the inevitable challenges (including litigation) from disappointed candidates starts, it is only a matter of time before these examiners who would be called upon to explain their assessment/award, decline to accept further assignments from the Commission,” the bench said.

The bench, however, noted that if a case in which the public interest requires furnishing of information, the Court will certainly do so. “If rules or practice so require, certainly such rule or practice can be enforced. In the present case, direction has been issued without considering these parameters,” the bench maintained.