ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846

A+| A| A-

Language Choice and Life Chances: Evidence from the Civil Services Examination

Careers in the civil service are a continuing source of prestigious employment to the middle and upper classes of non-metropolitan India, even as the erstwhile elite classes look for greener pastures. Differential access to languages, especially to English, distinguishes the "national" and regional elites in India. This article presents evidence relating to language choice from the civil services exams post-1979. The perceptible changes in preferences of candidates taking this exam reflect a new confidence with using Indian languages led by Hindi and mirror the larger changes in the linguistic landscape and in linguistic relations.

COMMENTARY

Language Choice and Life Chances: Evidence from the Civil Services Examination

Maruthi P Tangirala

aspirant classes has changed such that the hinterland rather than the metropolis now yields up our directly recruited district

o fficers and such other cadres that populate government bureaucracies today. There is also some evidence that the English-spouting urban job-seeker has vacated the arena for government jobs by recourse to more remunerative “new economy” occu-

Careers in the civil service are a continuing source of prestigious employment to the middle and upper classes of non-metropolitan India, even as the erstwhile elite classes look for greener pastures. Differential access to languages, especially to English, distinguishes the “national” and regional elites in India. This article presents evidence relating to language choice from the civil services exams post-1979. The perceptible changes in preferences of candidates taking this exam reflect a new confidence with using Indian languages led by Hindi and mirror the larger changes in the linguistic landscape and in linguistic relations.

Maruthi P Tangirala (tangirala_mp@ yahoo.com) is with the Union Public Service Commission, New Delhi.

A
compulsory knowledge of the vernacular was thought necessary for Indian civil servants recruited in India since 1922 (Shukla 1982: 485-90; Srivastava 1965: 87-88); the requirement was done away with, ironically, for recruitments in the early years of independent India. It was reintroduced into the modified recruitment scheme put in place by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) in 1979 in keeping with the recommendations of the Kothari Committee (UPSC 1976). Exogenous pressure in the form of the Official Language Resolution (OLR) of 1968 had ensured, however, that candidates for the combined competitive examination for the Indian Administrative Service (IAS), the Indian Police Service (IPS) and Central Services could “use any of the languages included in the Eighth Schedule or English as medium for answering the papers on General Know ledge and Essay” (UPSC 1976: iv) from 1969.

The OLR itself recognised the necessity of “ensuring that the just claims and interest of people belonging to different parts of the country in regard to the public services of the Union are fully safeguarded” and resolved (in broad terms) that (i) compulsory knowledge of either Hindi or English shall be required for selection for recruitment to union services/posts, and (ii) all Eighth Schedule (ES) languages shall be permitted as alternative media for UPSC examinations. The half-hearted yet “not just an unhappy” compromise (Austin 2009) on the language issue was thus taken f orward by the resolution, for perhaps it was still true (and continues to be so) that the “language of the union and provincial civil services meant money and social status to the middle and upper classes, for the services were their primary source of p restigious employment” (ibid: 45). A necdotal evidence does exist of the e xtent to which the composition of these

september 26, 2009

pations, rather than been evicted by the semi-urban youngster comfortable in her mother tongue in both spoken and written forms.1 Civil service careers are indeed a continuing source of prestigious employment to the middle and upper classes of the recently assertive middle and lower castes of non-metropolitan India, even as the previous incumbents move on to greener pastures in an increasingly liberalised globe given that

…in every field offering a promising career in the contemporary world, the upper castes dominate and the middle and lower castes are more or less severely under-represented (Deshpande 2004: 120).

The importance accorded to the bureaucracy, and consequently, of access to its charmed circles, by these assertive sections of Indian society may appear misplaced in the context of poverty, disempowerment, and marginalisation that their larger community labours under. Yet, this importance is of a piece with the perception that the fracturing of the image of state-as-an-arbiter2 paradoxically “legitimises a state that endorses the new hierarchies defined by modern institutions such as the bureaucracy, the development community, the technocracy and the security establishment” (Nandy 2003: 57). The “political counter-community” (ibid: 54-55) that dominates the state and understands the working of the state better than most may indeed have a considerable stake in smoothening the ride for the less bolder members of the larger community to place themselves in positions of importance in the bureaucracy that give “even the lower government functionaries, enormous power over most of the citizens given the abject poverty, illiteracy and lingering feudal culture” (goi 2008: 3).

Access to Languages

One of the different axes of differentiation of the middle class since the mid-1980s

vol xliv no 39

EPW
Economic & Political Weekly

COMMENTARY

One could imagine a division into: monolingual English speakers; a large bilingual segment consisting of (a) those whose first language is English, but who have a firm link with some Indian language; and (b) those whose first language is an Indian one, but who are confident in English as well; and finally, a large group which is rooted in Indian languages and has no real access to English (Deshpande 2004: 148).

On a more general level, one unique characteristic of post-independence India has been the simultaneous existence of two alternative official languages, while a vast majority of the people speak either only their regional language or some c ombination of a local “mother tongue” and the regional language (Brass 2009). In this view, the relationship between p ossible language choices and life chances in India

…..presents us with three broad levels:

(1) higher-level elite speakers of English, with English-knowing Hindi-speakers (Hindi bilinguals) having an added advantage in the central government and in the national capital, where Hindi is the dominant language, in postings in the Hindi-speaking region as well as in those states, such as Andhra, where variants of Hindi-Urdu are known to a large segment of the population; (2) intermediate level elite speakers of Hindi only, or a regional language; (3) lower-level non-elite, poorly educated or even illiterate speakers of a regional language, and/or a local ‘mother tongue’ (Brass 2009: 190).

Brass concludes that English-knowing bi linguals and trilinguals have a competitive advantage in the elite positions available to Indians at the national and international level, and given the statistical distribution,3 “non-Hindi speakers in that category have a competitive advantage at the topmost levels in comparison with the smaller numbers of English-knowing bilinguals and trilinguals from the Hindispeaking pool” (ibid: 191).

A third frame of analysis views the l anguage divide as a marker for the sharp differences in sociocultural terms between “two elite groups: the nationally e ntrenched, pan-Indian English-educated elite and the new but ascendant elites who have lately emerged on the national scene but sans the trappings of an English education” (Sheth 2009: 271). The national or pan-Indian elite is educated in the English medium, and English is virtually their first language; the vast majority of regional elite (educated youth) have little or no exposure to English. Progressive democratisation has caused a shift in political power in favour of the regional elites:

The result is that the political schism which always existed between the ‘national’ and regional elites has now widened along sociocultural dimensions with the caste-class and rural-urban differences between them being overlaid by the language divide: the ‘national’ elite by and large operating in English, and the regional elite in the respective regional languages (Sheth 2009: 281).

Evidence of Change

The present article seeks to present limited empirical data within this framework of language choices that have been noticed to affect life chances, specifically with reference to the civil services examination (CSE) for recruitment to the All I ndia Services and Central Services. The CSE is successor to the hoary examination that was used to recruit the Indian Civil Service, that was, after the ancient Chinese system, “…perhaps, the first civil service to be d eliberately and consciously constituted on the basis of recruitment by means of examination” (Vithal 2001: 209), and continues to be an examination of considerable complexity, perhaps befitting that exalted status, unperturbed by the shifting sands of time. The frame of reference of this article is limited to the examination scheme that was introduced with the CSE 1979, and that has changed only marginally since. Candidates can opt to answer papers III to IX of the main examination in any of the ES languages, numbering 22 at present, and such candidates also have the option of being interviewed in the same language as well.

The candidature at the CSE is quite large, and has shown an increase in the 2009 version of the preliminary examination, where it went up by 26.1% over the 2008 numbers, perhaps as a response to the economic slowdown.4 Graduates in any discipline, between 21 and 28 years of age subject to further relaxations for some communities, are eligible to appear. The preliminary examination is designed to be a screening test, and the number of candidates who qualify for the main examination is about 12 to 13 times the number of vacancies announced by the government for the particular year. The time taken to complete the entire process from n otification in December of the previous year to declaring final results before the next preliminary examination now held in May is about 18 months.

Table 1 gives the annual figures at the main examination for the candidates who have attempted the papers using (1) Hindi, and (2) any of the other ES languages5 as medium of response. The figures have been arrived at by using the number of candidates who have appeared at the general studies paper for a particular year using that medium, extracted from UPSC annual reports. Two conclusions are immediately obvious: One, that there is a steady increase of candidates opting for Indian languages as medium of writing CSE; and two, that the large bulk of such candidates do so in Hindi. The simple average of the per cent using Indian languages in the first decade of 1979-88 is 15.6%, that for the s econd decade of 1989-98 is 26.8%,

Table 1: Indian Languages as Medium of Response

Year A H IL % H % IL
1979 6,815 800 898 11.7 13.2
1980 8,366 983 1,095 11.7 13.1
1981 8,400 844 950 10.0 11.3
1982 8,684 1,168 1,308 13.5 15.1
1983 9,354 1,355 1,553 14.5 16.6
1984 9,851 1,383 1,614 14.0 16.4
1985 9,483 1,320 1,522 13.9 16.0
1986 9,028 1,466 1,687 16.2 18.7
1987 9,103 1,463 1,665 16.1 18.3
1988 9,253 1,389 1,598 15.0 17.3
1989 9,408 1,459 1,712 15.5 18.2
1990 10,129 1,446 1,668 14.3 16.5
1991 10,411 1,819 2,040 17.5 19.6
1992 10,302 1,941 2,180 18.8 21.2
1993 9,718 2,117 2,347 21.8 24.2
1994 10,548 2,632 2,914 25.0 27.6
1995 8,696 2,540 2,786 29.2 32.0
1996 8,097 2,393 2,599 29.6 32.1
1997 8,125 2,829 3,106 34.8 38.2
1998 8,789 3,088 3,412 35.1 38.8
1999 4,718 1,476 1,663 31.3 35.2
2000 4,725 1,500 1,639 31.7 34.7
2001 5,244 2,041 2,148 38.9 41.0
2002 3,301 1,270 1,332 38.5 40.4
2003 5,750 2,468 2,590 42.9 45.0
2004 5,328 2,191 2,338 41.1 43.9
2005 4,923 1,880 2,025 38.2 41.1
2006 7,496 3,306 3,556 44.1 47.4
2007 8,886 3,751 4,069 42.2 45.8
2008 11,330 NA NA

A – appeared; H – with Hindi as medium; IL – with any other Indian language as medium; % H – per cent using Hindi to total appeared; % IL – per cent Indian language to total appeared Source: UPSC Annual Reports.

EPW
september 26, 2009 vol xliv no 39

COMMENTARY

and for the nine years of the decade since for which data is available, this has increased to 41.6%. Of the number of candidates opting for an Indian language as medium, the number of those who use Hindi over the 29 years is 90.1%, with decadal averages being 87.8% (1979-88), 89.5% (1989-98), and 93.1% (1999-2007), showing both a strong preponderance of Hindi among Indian languages as well as a marginal i ncrease of the ratio of Hindiusing candidates among those using any Indian language to answer CSE papers.

The distribution of candidates based on the Indian language paper I of the main CSE over the years is given in Table 2 (p 19). The decadal figures show that while on an a verage 66.7% of the candidates writing paper I opted for Hindi during 1979-88, the figure rose to 74.9% for 1989-98 and then marginally to 76.9% for 1999-2007.6

Table 3 (p 19) gives the number of candidates opting for one of the Indian languages as medium of interview/personality test. The ratio of those opting to be interviewed in an Indian language to those called for interview is significantly lower than the ratio of Indian language optees at the written examination stage. However, the average percentage has shown an increase from 13.3% in the decade 1987-96 to 24.3% in 1997-2006. Among candidates who reach the interview stage, more than a quarter (32% in CSE 2007) are now o pting to be interviewed in an Indian language, and 383 (85.1%) of the 450 so interviewed in CSE 2007 chose Hindi, and this is consistent with the pattern in previous years. The increase in Indian language interviews is a definite measure of the decrease in importance accorded to anything higher than rudimentary knowledge of the English language, and the higher proportion of Hindi-speakers is consistent with their examination-wide preponderance.

Table 4 (p 19) gives some comparator figures for the period before the Kothari scheme for CSE, relating to the use of Indian language as medium for writing essay and general knowledge papers. The signifi cantly lesser ratio of candidates opting to use an Indian language as medium for general knowledge (average 9.3%) as compared to essay (average 18.3%) is a pparent.

English-speaking vs Regional Elites

The preliminary conclusions from the data presented can be seen along two dimensions: (1) the increase in relative number of candidates opting for one of the Indian languages as medium; and

(2) the preponderance of Hindi (speakers) among them.

Pre-1979, the average ratio of candidates writing the essay in an Indian language is twice that of those answering the general knowledge paper, and adopting this figure as proxy for the metric post1979, about one in five candidates opted to attempt the papers in an Indian language.7 In the new CSE scheme, however, leaving out the preliminary stage consisting of

o bjective type papers (note however that these papers are bilingual – set in English and Hindi), the ratio of such candidates has steadily gone up over the years, and most recently stands above 40% of those attempting the main examination. Since all those clearing the preliminary stage can be classified as serious candidates, this increase is a very good indicator of the improvement in life chances of the i ntermediate elite level speakers (Brass 2009) of Indian languages at the t opmost jobs in government. It is my contention that most of the increase in relative numbers belongs to the intermediate level, or, in Deshpande’s schema, to those whose first language is an Indian one (Deshpande 2004), whether or not they are confident in English. At least one elite level Englishspeaker out of four attempting CSE main examination has been replaced by an intermediate level Indian-languagebilingual over the last three decades.

SAMEEKSHA TRUST BOOKS

1857

Essays from Economic and Political Weekly

A compilation of essays that were first published in the EPW in a special issue in May 2007. Held together with an introduction by Sekhar Bandyopadhyay, the essays – that range in theme and subject from historiography and military engagements, to the dalit viranganas idealised in traditional songs and the “unconventional protagonists” in mutiny novels – converge on one common goal: to enrich the existing national debates on the 1857 Uprising.

The volume has 18 essays by well known historians who include Biswamoy Pati, Dipesh Chakrabarty, Peter Robb and Michael Fisher.The articles are grouped under five sections: ‘Then and Now’, ‘Sepoys and Soldiers’, ‘The Margins’, ‘Fictional Representations’ and ‘The Arts and 1857’.

Pp viii + 364 2008 Rs 295

Available from

Orient Blackswan Pvt Ltd

Mumbai Chennai New Delhi Kolkata Bangalore Bhubaneshwar Ernakulam Guwahati Jaipur Lucknow Patna Chandigarh Hyderabad Contact: info@orientblackswan.com

september 26, 2009 vol xliv no 39

EPW
Economic & Political Weekly

COMMENTARY

political institutions, and represents a almost 42% of the total) of candidates

1979 4,236 2,456 6,692 63.3

1980 5,256 2,956 8,212 64.0

1981 5,259 2,966 8,225 63.9

1982 5,617 2,909 8,526 65.9

1983 5,914 3,256 9,170 64.5

1984 6,096 3,096 9,192 66.3

1985 6,282 3,017 9,299 67.6

1986 6,071 2,780 8,851 68.6

1987 6,363 2,556 8,919 71.3

1988 6,446 2,616 9,062 71.1

1989 6,709 2,498 9,207 72.9

1990 7,067 2,861 9,928 71.2

1991 7,642 2,571 10,213 74.8

1992 7,345 2,756 10,101 72.7

1993 7,176 2,249 9,425 76.1

1994 7,611 2,629 10,240 74.3

1995 6,469 1,955 8,424 76.8

1996 5,974 1,862 7,836 76.2

1997 6,123 1,757 7,880 77.7

1998 6,489 2,045 8,534 76.0

1999 3,433 1,110 4,543 75.6

2000 3,484 1,108 4,592 75.9

2001 4,010 1,051 5,061 79.2

2002 2,506 670 3,176 78.9

2003 4,497 1,114 5,611 80.1

2004 3,953 1,221 5,174 76.4

2005 3,581 1,222 4,803 74.6

2006 5,626 1,701 7,327 76.8

2007 6,425 2,234 8,659 74.2

2008 NANA NA -

H – Hindi; IL – any other IL;T – H+IL; % H – % of Hindi toT. Source: UPSC Annual Reports.

Table 3: Indian Language at Interview

Year I % I Year I % I

1979 NA 1994 224 15.4

1980 NA 1995 247 18.8

1981 NA 1996 326 21.4

1982 NA 1997 306 24.2

1983 NA 1998 151 15.7

1984 NA 1999 150 17.8

1985 NA 2000 189 21.6

1986 NA 2001 264 23.2

1987 176 10.2 2002 207 27.7

1988 184 10.0 2003 351 29.8

1989 144 8.1 2004 280 24.1

1990 207 11.1 2005 322 27.5

1991 188 10.7 2006 450 32.0

1992 229 14.6 2007 NA

1993 203 13.0 2008 NA -

I – Number interviewed in any Indian language; % I – % I to total interviewed. Source: UPSC Annual Reports.

The political schism between the Englishspeaking elite and the regional elites (Sheth 2009) thus seems to have had an impact on the composition of those attempting CSE. The larger number of candidates opting to write the examination in an Indian language mirrors the increased ascendance of the regional elites in the consolidation of their effort to break into the higher echelons of the administrative structure as well.

This brings us to the second leg of the conclusion that relates to what appears at first sight to be a disproportionately high incidence at around 90% of Hindibilinguals in the group opting for Indian language med ium. Table 2 shows that as far as the Indian l anguage compulsory p aper is concerned, the ratio of those choosing Hindi to any other I ndian language has gone up from about two in three to about three in four for the period of report. This ratio of 76.9% is considerably higher than the estimate of 41.03% for Hindi-speaking persons who returned the language as their mother tongue as a per cent of total population in the 2001 Census (Abbi 2009: 300). The comparative figures for five languages (Bengali – 8.11%, Telugu – 7.19%, Marathi

  • 6.99%, Tamil – 5.91%, and Urdu – 5.01%) that had speakers above 5% to t otal population, as well as one other l anguage (Oriya
  • 3.21%) below that level are indicated in Tables 5 and 6 (p 20). Of the six, four languages showed relatively l esser representation overall as compared to their share of the population. In the most recent decade, all except one l anguage show lower representation c ompared to share of total population, in distinct contrast to the case of Hindi. Put together, these six languages that constitute more than 36% of the population, are represented only to the extent of 20.6% overall (and 17% in the most recent d ecade) in CSE.
  • There are thus two aspects to the a pparent preponderance of Hindi-speakers among the candidates – (1) a higher representation of Hindi-speakers among all candidates as compared to the share of population; and (2) an even higher opting to write CSE in any I ndian language in the last decade, more than 93% are Hindi-speakers. In a ddition, on both counts, the trend line shows an i ncrease in favour of Hindi-speakers.

    Do these trends reflect a creeping dominance of Hindi among Indian languages, the revenge of the “insulted disprivileged speakers of Hindi” (Kaviraj 2009: 348) who, in the early 1990s, resuscitated the older debate regarding a “national” language, and among other things, rather forcefully articulated the demand for using Hindi “as the exclusive language for entrance examination of various types of government and semi-government bureaucracy” (Kaviraj 2009)? Are they to be welcomed as a small but significant movement to narrow the “contradiction between the two common senses, lodged largely in the English and the vernaculars” (Kaviraj 2009: 346) and thereby attenuate the strain affecting the conceptual basis of the Indian state? Does the disproportionately high representation of Hindi-speakers in CSE help the cause of evolving a pan-Indian national consciousness so beloved of the emerging political leadership in the north, or is it the death knell of pluralism and a signifier of the barriers to occupational mobility long feared in the south of the country?

    Ascendancy of Hindi

    The state of language choice and trends observed in both ES language use and by major linguistic groups show the gradual ascendance of Hindi in the larger scheme of the examination. The higher incidence of mono lingualism among Hindi-speakers8 has been noticed in the literature (Sheth 2009: 287-88), and the relatively poor state of physical and social infrastructure in the core Hindi-speaking states is general

    proportion of candidates Table 4: Indian Language Use Pre-1979

    opting to write CSE in Year EE EIL T %EIL GKE GKIL T %GKIL
    Hindi medium among 1970 5,656 1,069 6,725 15.9 6,002 633 6,635 9.5
    those opting to write in 1971 6,376 1,243 7,619 16.3 6,776 738 7,514 9.8
    any Indian language. While 41% of Indians report Hindi to be their 1972197319741975 6,935 10,544 11,518 12,746 1,489 2,066 2,506 2,746 8,424 12,610 14,024 15,492 17.7 16.4 17.9 17.7 7,570 11,393 12,628 13,801 854 1,019 1,219 1,437 8,424 12,412 13,847 15,238 10.1 8.2 8.8 9.4
    mother tongue, more 1976 14,104 3,523 17,627 20.0 15,764 1,628 17,392 9.4
    than 76% of candidates 1977 13,624 3,735 17,359 21.5 OT - - -
    appearing at CSE are 1978 14,500 4,357 18,857 23.1 OT - - -

    EE/GKE – Essay/general knowledge in English; EIL/GKIL – Essay/general knowledge in any

    comfortable in Hindi;

    Indian language; T – Total; %EIL/GKIL – % EIL/GKIL to T and of the population (of Source: UPSC Annual Reports.

    EPW
    september 26, 2009 vol xliv no 39

    COMMENTARY

    Table 5: Indian Language Paper – Other Than Hindi more serious candidates” (UPSC 1976: 43). This in

    of north India, CSE offers important insight

    my view significantly affects the comparability ofinto the changing relations b etween India’s pre- and post-1979 figures.

    Year B T M Ta U O

    1979 291 414 150 409 47 372

    linguistic groups. 8 According to Sheth, bilingualism among Hindi

    1980 347 568 147 451 57 525

    speakers is only 4.74% against the national aver1981 293 616 156 447 70 502 age of 13.34% (1981 Census).

    Notes

    1982 284 659 148 399 65 564

    1983 301 827 165 450 60 644
    1984 226 937 126 348 58 696
    1985 220 1,013 139 302 50 629
    1986 185 967 161 273 42 554
    1987 185 845 177 260 45 505
    1988 175 906 203 257 52 438
    1989 203 919 212 219 48 357
    1990 196 1,080 219 281 55 396
    1991 215 930 228 269 44 350
    1992 179 1,089 240 301 40 361
    1993 179 837 241 229 56 282
    1994 200 948 254 364 58 260
    1995 107 729 253 251 49 167
    1996 132 597 263 264 47 154
    1997 79 601 246 249 56 121
    1998 87 633 269 317 60 169
    1999 71 291 148 190 19 86
    2000 69 268 173 190 23 78
    2001 58 203 166 224 22 90
    2002 24 120 103 197 12 35
    2003 47 185 192 344 18 65
    2004 25 216 184 402 17 52
    2005 29 191 179 427 15 62
    2006 41 337 256 495 20 74
    2007 64 432 379 665 22 102
    2008 NA NA NA NA NA NA

    B – Bengali; T – Telugu; M – Marathi; Ta – Tamil; U – Urdu; O – Oriya;. Source: UPSC Annual Reports.

    Table 6: Indian Language Paper – Decadal Trends, Non-Hindi (%)

    Decade B T M Ta U O To
    1979-88 3.0 8.9 1.8 4.2 0.6 6.3 24.9
    1989-98 1.7 9.0 2.7 3.0 0.6 2.8 19.7
    1999-2007 0.9 4.6 3.6 6.2 0.4 1.3 17.0
    All 1.9 7.6 2.7 4.4 0.5 3.5 20.6

    B – Bengali; T – Telugu; M – Marathi; Ta – Tamil; U – Urdu; O – Oriya; To – Total six non-Hindi IL. Source: UPSC Annual Reports.

    knowledge. The highly vocal and visible political mobilisation in these states has not yet yielded tangible economic benefits to their large populations, in comparison to the southern states that are seen as h aving benefited more from LPG. The charm, security, and social prestige that a job in the higher government bureaucracy assures for the Hindi-speaker are magnified in such a milieu, and could be contributing to not only manifest preference, but also, in view of the advantage afforded to ES languages by CSE, to higher than proportional success at the examination. As a proxy for the improving life chances for the regional elite, especially that from the “centre of the centre” (Weiner 2001: 481)

    1 This proposition is somewhat different from, say, that articulated by Sheth, who argues that in the peninsular states of south India and in western Maharashtra the earlier protest movements have now acquired political power and consolidate it by gaining control over the job market in the government sector through this power, while in the other states, the “numerically strong and upwardly mobile groups of the middle and intermediate castes have, by and large, succeeded in casting out the upper-caste elite from positions of power and to some extent from white-collar jobs as well” (Sheth 2009: 278, emphasis mine). While numerical strength indeed allows stronger groups to ‘cast out’ weaker ones, it is my contention that the numerically weaker upper-caste elites (who also constitute the elite English speakers) have aspired to, and succeeded in autonomously accessing high-paying employment avenues in the LPG milieu that occupy social and cultural spaces quite distinct from the rough-and-tumble of a dministrative positions in government. The push factor is at best indirect.

    2 The other two images of the state in the popular culture of Indian politics that corner the state-asan-arbiter are those of state-as-a-protector and state-as-a-liberator (Nandy 2003).

    3 Brass arrives at a figure of 60,184,313 non-Hindispeakers who know English and 29,858,174 Hindispeakers who know English (1991 Census).

    4 The number of admitted candidates in 2009 is 3,86,572 compared to 3,06,633 in 2008. The numbers (2000 – 2,16,633) increased steadily every year till 2006 (3,83,983) but decreased in 2007 (3,33,680) and 2008.

    5 These were 15 between CSE 1979 and 1992, 18 b etween 1993 and 2006, and are 22 thereafter.

    6 The figures in the “Total” column of Table 2 do not tally with the figures in the “Appeared” column of Table 1 since Paper I in the main examination is not compulsory for candidates from the six states of Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, M izoram, Nagaland, and Sikkim.

    7 Only about one in 20 of the successful candidates had attempted the essay paper in an Indian language, however (UPSC 1976: 19). Remember that this was a single stage written examination unlike after 1979, when the preliminary examination was used “to widen the base of recruitment and provide a primary screening test for the identification of the

    References

    Abbi, Anvita (2009): “Vanishing Diversities and Submerging Identities: An Indian Case” in Asha Sarangi (ed.), Language and Politics in India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press), pp 299-311.

    Austin, Granville (2009): “Language and the Constitution: The Half-Hearted Compromise” reproduced in Asha Sarangi (ed.), Language and Politics in India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press), pp 41-92.

    Brass, R Paul (2009): “Elite Interests, Popular Passions, and Social Power in the Language Politics of India” in Asha Sarangi (ed.), Language and Politics in India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press), pp 183-217.

    Deshpande, Satish (2004): Contemporary India: A S ociological View (New Delhi: Penguin Books).

    GoI (2008): “Second Administrative Reforms Commission (SARC X)”, Refurbishing of Personnel Administration: Scaling New Heights, Government of India, Tenth Report.

    Kaviraj, Sudipta (2009): “Writing, Speaking, Being: Language and the Historical Formation of Identities in India” reproduced in Asha Sarangi (ed.), Language and Politics in India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press), pp 312-50.

    Nandy, Ashis (2003): “Democratic Culture and Images of the State: India’s Unending Ambivalence” in Time Warps (Delhi: Permanent Black).

    Sheth, D L (2009): “The Great Language Debate: Politics of Metropolitan versus Vernacular India” r eproduced in Asha Sarangi (ed.), Language and Politics in India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press), pp 267-95.

    Shukla, J D (1982): Indianisation of All-India Services and Its Impact on Administration (New Delhi: A llied Publishers).

    Srivastava, G P (1965): The Indian Civil Service: A Study in Administrative Personnel (New Delhi: S Chand & Co).

    UPSC (1976): Report of the Committee on Recruitment Policy and Selection Methods.

    – Annual Reports 1977-78 (28th) to 2007-08 (58th). Vithal, B P R (2001): “Evolving Trends in the Bureaucracy” in Partha Chatterjee (ed.), State and Politics in India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press), pp 208-31. Weiner, Myron (2001): “India’s Minorities: Who Are They? What Do They Want?” reproduced in

    Partha Chatterjee (ed.), State and Politics in India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press), pp 459-95.

    Mahatma Gandhi University

    Priyadarshini Hills, P.O, Kottayam – 686 560,Kerala Tel -0481 – 2731050

    No. Ad.A.II(1/C) / 550 /2009

    Website :www.mguniversity.edu

    Dated:12th September,2009.

    CORRIGENDUM

    Notification No. Ad.A.II(1) / 550 /2009 for

    FACULTY RECRUITMENT – PROFESSOR, READER, LECTURER

    It is here by notified that the qualifications, specialisation, eligibility conditions and the last date for submission for the above notification is here by amended as follows.

    CATEGORY A: PROFESSOR Sl. No. 3 School of Biosciences (Specialisation in Bio-chemistry desirable.) Sl.No. 5 School of Environmental Sciences ( Any branch of science with speclalisation in Ecological Aspects /Waste Management)

    ELIGIBILITY: Category C: Lecturer

    Sl.No. 2 under eligiblity for applying viz. Good academic record with doctoral degree or equivalent published work in the specialised subject is hereby deleted.

    Last date for application is extended to 7th October 2009.

    www.mguniversity.edu
    Sd/PRO/Advt/1/23b/2009

    M.R.Unni (Registrar)

    september 26, 2009 vol xliv no 39

    EPW
    Economic & Political Weekly

    Dear Reader,

    To continue reading, become a subscriber.

    Explore our attractive subscription offers.

    Click here

    Back to Top