Why do IAS and IFS officers have an edge in salary over IPS despite the same UPSC Civil Services Exam?

The 8th Central Pay Commission (CPC) will examine the pay structure and benefits of all employees of the central government, including officers of All India Services (AIS) and the Indian Foreign Service (IFS) who are appointed through a nationwide examination conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC).

Indian Administrative Service (IAS), Indian Police Service (IPS), and Indian Forest Service (IFoS) currently constitute the AIS. IFS is a Central Group A service.

IAS, IFS, and IPS officials are appointed through the Civil Services Exam (CSE) conducted by UPSC in two stages - Prelims and Mains. The preliminary exam for IFoS is the same as IAS and IPS, followed by the second stage of the Indian Forest Service (Main) examination, which follows a pattern similar to CSE.

However, the salaries drawn by IAS, IFS, IPS, and IFoS officials are not similar. Historically, IAS and IFS have enjoyed an edge in terms of pay and promotion over other central services.

The IAS and IFS officials get a pay advantage or an edge at three grades - Senior Time Scale, Junior Administrative Grade, and Selection Grade - in the form of two additional increments at 3% each. These additional increments offered to IAS and IFS members are over and above the promotional increment.

Why IAS and IFS have an edge

The edge in pay and promotions to members of the IAS and IFS over other all-India services such as IPS and IFoS was approved by second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth pay commissions. The reason for this, as mentioned in the 7th CPC report, is that "the role of IAS is still very important in the overall scheme of governance and that they have a multi-functional and integrating role in the administrative framework."

The 7th pay commission, however, couldn’t reach a consensus on the matter. Here's how previous pay panels addressed the issue of the edge:

The second pay commission concluded that the higher pay scales for the IAS and the IFS were justified as long as the criteria for selection to these services were higher and these services were getting recruits of a higher standard.

The third pay commission retained the edge. Arguing against the demand to remove the edge, the 3rd CPC noted that it would not be "feasible" to have identical pay scales simply based on the fact they are selected through a common initial examination and without taking into account the duties and responsibilities given to members of the different services.

The fourth pay commission also retained the edge. However, it recommended improvements for those services that sought parity with the IAS in their pay scales and career progression.

While continuing to maintain the edge, the fifth pay commission made the following remarks against the demands to remove it:

The chief argument is that all recruits to IAS and Central Services are inducted through the same examination. There may be a difference of only one mark between the last man in the IAS and the first man in the Central Services. That single mark should not make such a difference as to change their entire career patterns. This line of argument is not convincing. It is not correct to compare the last man of the IAS with the first man of the Central Services. If the first of each Service is looked at, the difference in marks obtained would be considerable. Besides, Group B’ services are also recruited through the same examination. If the 1-mark argument is conceded as between the IAS and Group A’ Central Services, the same should then result in parity between Group A’ Central Services and Group B’ Central Services.

However, the fifth pay panel noted that there should be better career progression for IPA and central services too.

At the time of the implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission’s recommendations, the government decided to continue the edge accorded to the IAS and IFS.

However, Vivek Rae, a member of the seventh CPC, said the edge for IAS and IFS was fully justified and should continue as it is. Another member, Dr. Rathin Roy, however, argued for removing the edge.

It is expected that the upcoming 8th pay commission may again look into the issue.

What the Supreme Court has said

In Mohan Kumar Singhania and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors. judgment delivered on September 13, 1991, the Supreme Court observed the following:

• Each service is a distinct and separate cadre, having its separate field of operation, with different status, prospects, pay scales, the nature of duties, the responsibilities to the post and conditions of service etc.

• Once a candidate is selected and appointed to a particular cadre, he cannot be allowed to say that he is at par with the others because all of them appeared and were selected by a combined competitive examination and viva voce test and that the qualifications prescribed are comparable.

What have been the arguments against the edge?

Since the time of the 2nd pay commission, other AIS and central services have been demanding the removal of edge in pay and promotions to IAS and IFS officials.

Initially, IAS and IFS aspirants had to appear for two additional papers with at least one paper outside of their field of study. Since 1979, the examination pattern became uniform for all services. Yet, the edge in pay and promotion for IAS and IFS has continued.

As per the 7th Pay Commission report, various central services contended that the edge given to the IAS and IFS was “iniquitous” and violated the principle of "equal pay for equal work." They argued that:

• Civil Services Examination (CSE) conducted by the UPSC is an examination that is common for recruitment to around 18 Group `A’.

• Services and the choice of Service exercised by the candidates is based upon very many factors. Only the top-most candidate doesn't need to go to the IAS.

• Officers of most of the services are, in their early years, posted to small places and are subjected to many transfers.