top of page
Writer's pictureBrigadier Vidur R Nevrekar

Vastly Different Selection Systems For Services Officers and Civil Servants Are Degrading the Military: A Contrary View by Brigadier Vidur R Nevrekar (Retired)

EDITOR'S NOTE


An article by Col Alok Asthana titled : "Vastly different selection systems for service officers and civil servants are degrading the military"

was published on 23 July 2024 by The Salute .


The article, when circulated widely on social media , drew curiosity of armed forces fraternity and raised eyebrows of bureaucrats who read it !

Since the article was technical in nature, only knowledgeable and experienced selectors of armed forces were competent to analyse and comment on its contents and recommendations.


Mission Victory India ( MVI ) circulated this piece widely amongst various veteran groups on social media and invited responses to the points raised and recommendations made by Col Alok Asthana .

An article received from Brig Vidur R Nevrekar ,a former President of SSB is being published to give the readers a rare insight of our present SSB officer selection system and the author's critical and analytical responses to the article by Col Asthana.

The readers are welcome to send their responses to continue this debate.



Col Vinay Dalvi,

Editor ,MVI



This refers to the article by Colonel Alok Asthana (Retired) titled as

above. I appreciate the efforts of the author to analyse the desired

quality profiles for the Civil Servants and the Services Officers, the

current selection systems and the changes required in his perspective

for both the categories. I, however, have a slightly different view on

different aspects, which I have penned below.




The comparison between Civil Servants and Services Officers as also

the need for something like the Services Selection Board (SSB) to be

applicable to the Civil Servants appears logical from the point of view of

a Services Officer. However, such a scheme is unlikely to be accepted

by the bureaucracy for reasons to do with systemic differences between

the two organizations.


For the purpose of my argument, the primary difference between

Services Officers and Bureaucrats is that Bureaucrats decide their own

selection and employment system. This includes aspects of their

employability, their pay and allowances, their service rules and

regulations, and procedures essential to all aspects of performance of

their duty. The ministry or the government is merely a rubber stamp to

their decisions. In contrast, for Services Officers, most of the

employment-based aspects are administered by the authorities other

than the Services.


Considering that, it can be safely assumed that the Civil Servants will

avoid applying a similar system as the SSB (so as to not dig a grave in

the selection process for their children). Further, the Defence Institute of

Psychological Research (DIPR), or Ministry of Defence (MoD), will also

never tweak the current system of selection. They will never want to risk

owning up to their consequent failure, if any, due to the systems of

selection.



The author also suggests that the SSB needs to be made easier or

abolished for the officers below certain ranks. From my experience and

perception, I feel that there is a folly in this reasoning. A lot of work was

done towards implementing a new system of selection, named Denovo,


to replace the current procedure of SSB, aiming to reduce the selection

process from 5 days to 3 days by introducing certain changes. However,

the futility of Denovo was understood after spending years of

brainstorming by the DIPR and the community of assessors at SSB. This

system has finally, rightly so, been shelved.


It is strange to note the opinion of the author that the importance of SSB

is only for senior officers, from Colonels and above. The reasoning he

offers is that till the rank of Colonels, armed forces merely require

officers who will stand at the head of some troops and close in with the

enemy and thus don’t need to be tested in a process as stringent as the

SSB. His opinion is inaccurate not just for warzone or operational

formation or units, it is equally inappropriate for peace time

administrative jobs at some higher headquarters. A junior officer without

SSB will always be a risky bet.


At every level of interaction with the troops, from morning PT and

training to the evening roll call, from leisurely Bada Khana to intense

operations, the officer-like qualities (OLQs) tested by the SSB are

important. These are the qualities which evolve the Regimental Ethos. It

is fallacy to assume that the Regimental Ethos is created by a few

Generals sitting at the Services Headquarters, even if they may form an

important catalyst towards them. It is the junior officers who cultivate and

build the Regimental Ethos.


The history of the Indian Army is replete with examples of junior officers

with muscles of iron and nerves of steel.


Captain Manoj Pandey, PVC wrote to one of his friends before he went

in for his final operation, “I can assure you and all countrymen that

certainly we would push back intruders at whatever cost we have to pay,

maybe our lives.” They pushed the enemy back and sacrificed their lives

too.


“Either I will come back after hoisting the Tricolour or I will come back

wrapped in it, but I will be back for sure” were the last words of Captain

Vikram Batra, PVC. The Tricolour was hoisted but he unfortunately

came wrapped in it.


In the 1971 operations, Captain(IN) Mahendra Nath Mulla, VrC, chose to

go down with the sinking INS Khukri in line with the highest traditions of

the Service.


Without the qualities assessed at the SSB, such attitudes and acts will

be impossible to be seen among so many in one organisation. Such

martyrdom is not due to a stray bullet piercing through the body; these

are conscious acts of sacrifice.


We all sign something like an Unlimited Liability Contract at the time of

our commission, which is embedded in our oath too. Very few, not

assessed by SSB, would accept to sign such bonds and be prepared for

the moments that call for this supreme sacrifice.



Swami Vivekanand said that our bodies, our virtues, our intellect and our

spirituality, all of these are continuously influencing others. The virtues of

these brave soldiers, like Capt Manoj Pandey, Maj Ritesh Sharma, Capt

Anuj Nair, Sqn Ldr Ajay Ahuja, Capt Amol Kalia, Capt Saurav Kalia,

Capt Vikram Batra, and many others fighting conventional and Counter

Insurgency operations, influence fellow officers and other ranks to create

the Regimental Ethos which enables everyone to fight selflessly.

Numerous examples can be given to make the case why the SSB in its

present form is essential for every Service Officer irrespective of their

seniority rank or appointment.


The SSB primarily assesses candidates for their operational

performance and not a peace time office job.


I give the training regime in the academies its due credit to prepare an

officer for the supreme sacrifice. However, it can be appreciated that not

everyone can be moulded effectively by the training unless the person is

capable enough to learn and change with the training. SSBs undertake

this arduous task to select the best person who can be trained

effectively.


Technology may have changed at the higher headquarters but at the

Forward Defended Localities (FDLs), things are not much different from

what they were in 1947 or even earlier.


When an injured soldier is lying between two FDLs, and is to be

retrieved, the qualities required by the officer to carry out that task are

the same today as they were in 1947 or before. As such, tweaking with

the system of selection is not advisable when the end result we expect

remains the same.


Since I am from the Army, I tend to quote more examples from the Army,

but I am sure the officers from Indian Navy and AirForce will see similar

performances in their cadre, if not better.



The author has also mentioned that we have only 30% officers who have

something to look forward to after about 15 years of service when the

board for their selection to the Selection Grade Colonel(and equivalent)

is done. Yes. At any point in time we have approximately 50% of our

cadre strength of approximately 50000 officers(army) who have lost all

chances of promotions in their respective ranks. Almost 95% of passed

out officers retire in the rank of Colonel.


Any other organization with so many officers having nothing to look

forward to would have crumbled. However, the selfless attitude,

tremendous love for their Regimental Ethos, and the inborn values and

beliefs, which the SSB tests, ensure that even such a large percentage

of overlooked officers do not cause a threat to the organization. They

are, in fact, completely dedicated, disciplined and give their everything to

the organization in spite of knowing that they have nothing to take from it

except the pay and allowances. In the recent past, we have seen an

Army Commander gracefully receiving the Chief who was his Corps

Commander a few days back. It is only a matter of perception if this

could have been possible without the ethos of ‘organization above self’

that the SSB tests in an individual.


The contention of the author that the shortage of officers is due to the

strictness of the SSB may be partially correct, but it is only half the

picture. Notwithstanding the toughness or otherwise of selection system,

government policies and societal attitudes towards attracting youth

towards the Defence Forces matter a lot.

I would say that we are severely failing in that regard. There is an utter

lack of efforts at Government level, at University level, and at the School

or College level in most states to motivate the youth to join the Defence

Forces. As a result the quality of the youth, especially men, reaching the

level of SSB is much below the desired levels of acceptance. This is the

youth which does not have Defence Forces as their passion. Rather,

they normally come here as a last resort.


The meagre number of recommended candidates is the result of this unfortunate phenomenon which results in the rejection of a large proportion of the candidates.

In contrast, if you see any entry for lady officers, you will find that a

substantial number of ladies getting merited out because the women

opting to join the Defence Forces are much more passionate towards

the services but the vacancies available are much lesser. As President

of an SSB, there was a time when I had 19 women getting recommended out of 30 screened in for that one batch. I felt sorry knowing that not more than four of these would be able to join the Academy, with the rest getting merited out.



Even at a level of NDA for men, there are instances when many

candidates could not join due to a shortage of vacancies and

consequently got merited out. Therefore, it is incorrect to blame the SSB

for a shortage of officers in the Defence Forces.


To conclude, I am with the author for having some kind of system to test

the psychological aspect of the Civil Servants, provided this process is

approved by the bureaucrats themselves, which seems highly unlikely.

However, not having the SSB or even diluting its standards for officers of

Defence Services below the rank of Commanding Officers will be a

move with dire consequences for the nation.


Brig Vidur Ramchandra Nevrekar was commissioned to The Regiment of Artillery in 1982 and later commanded a Medium Regiment in Akhnoor in 2002. He raised an Artillery Brigade in Western RALP in 2009. He was President 21 SSB between 2012 and 2014 from where he superannuated.



139 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

댓글


bottom of page