Suresh Prabhu is a dynamic minister. This, of course, does not make up for the fact that he belongs to the Shiv Sena, a party that epitomises the worst of Indian politics. Prabhu may or may not share Bal Thackeray's rabid social views but he is serving with admirable competence as the Union minister of power. His latest move to induct a private-sector executive, R.V. Shahi, as his top civil servant is a remarkable step. Shahi, who cut his teeth in the public sector NTPC and then managed BSEs, the country's leading private-sector power company, is one of the country's most distinguished power engineers. However, this is not the first time that the Power Ministry has had a "technocrat" at its helm: in the early 1980s, Indira Gandhi had inducted as its secretary D.V. Kapur, the man who created and built NTPC in its initial years.

There have been three groups of technocrats in government-economists, scientists and engineers. Economists have served primarily in the Finance Ministry and in the Planning Commission, scientists in scientific departments and engineers in ministries like railways, telecom and industry. Specialised cadres for engineers and economists also exist.

In the past, there have been quite a few instances of eminent public-sector chief executives being inducted into the highest policy-making positions in government. K.S.R. Chari was brought in by Mohan Kumaramangalam when the coal industry was being nationalised in 1971-72. In the 1970s, noted technologists like Mantosh Sondhi from Bokaro Steel, V. Krishnamurthy from BHEL, S. Varadarajan from IPCL and K.P.P. Nambiar from Keltron became Union secretaries.

But Shahi has been picked up from the private sector for a job that has traditionally not seen professional experts. There have been few occasions in the past when such an induction was made. In the mid-1960s, Lovraj Kumar was weaned away from Burmah Shell by his uncle Dharma Vira and he went on to have a distinguished career in government culminating as petroleum secretary in 1981-83. One of his greatest contributions was to mentor a number of younger professionals in government-Kautilya being one of this fortunate group. In 1972, M.A. Wadud Khan, a former chairman of TOMCO who had earlier been appointed the first chairman of SAIL by Kumaramangalam, was made steel secretary. In the mid-1970s, Indira Gandhi inducted V.G. Rajadhyaksha into the Planning Commission as a member after his tenure as chairman of Hindustan Lever. When he took over as prime minister, Rajiv Gandhi hired P.S. Deodhar, an entrepreneur who had set up his own company Aplab, as chairman of the Electronics Commission. Rajiv's boldest and most productive move was to bring in Sam Pitroda, who energised the system through the various technology missions in 1987-89, a remarkable process that Kautilya was privileged to be part of.

Technocrats can be expected to do well in staff jobs but are they effective in line jobs like that of a secretary? Not necessarily. Scientists with some exceptions have generally been poor administrators. Economists have made a mark as advisers but not as problem-solvers or decision-takers. Engineers have had a better record but then the question is whether being a secretary, pushing files, interacting with the bureaucracy and Parliament and attending countless meetings is the best use of the talent of a Shahi, who has been an outstanding CEO. The skills required for a great CEO are quite different from those for a successful secretary. The tragedy is that in our system, the culture of administration is very seductive and being designated as secretary to the government of India carries the highest prestige even for technocrats who have made outstanding contributions and earned a name for themselves. Many public-sector ceos in the 1980s pleaded with Rajiv Gandhi to have themselves designated as ex-officio secretaries to the government of India and have direct access to their ministers. Not only did the IAS scuttle this move but even senior ministers opposed the idea vehemently. Politicians prefer to deal with the IAS.

What the government needs most is recirculation and renewal of human resources. That is simply not happening. Professionals do enter but become semi-permanent fixtures, getting ossified as they go along. There is no revolving door through which new talent comes in, makes its contributions over three to five years and then departs, making way for others to follow. Specialisation is at a deep discount and the way the Union Finance Ministry has been managed in the past four years is symptomatic. What is different about Shahi is that at 57, he is not bothered about feathering his nest in government. Of course, there is little that a Union secretary of power can do given that the bankrupt electricity boards are controlled by the states. But to the extent that he can push power sector reforms forward, provide leadership and give youngsters an opportunity to work along with him, Shahi is best qualified.

(The author is with the Congress party. These are his personal views)