Title: Should we call off the UPSC? 

Changing the Indian Bureaucracy and Affecting Young People Often praised as a portal to prestige, power, and an opportunity to serve the country is the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) in India. Most famously for the Indian Administrative Service (IAS), lakhs of candidates commit years of their young life to get ready for its highly demanding tests. Still, a rising number of detractors contend that this cherished system is no longer fulfilling its intended use. Rather, they argue it results in a culture of corruption, extensive red tape, and inefficiencies, therefore squandering the priceless early years of India's best brains.This blog will go over some of the complaints made against the UPSC system—how it might be failing the young, allowing corruption, and fostering low government official responsibility. 1. Waste of Youngish Time and Energy Great Preparation and Uncertain Results• To pass the UPSC tests, aspirant public servants frequently commit anywhere between two and five years—and perhaps even more. • The sheer scope of the syllabus, together with the erratic nature of the question papers, mean most candidates spend their prime years juggling several attempts; • This extensive preparation can delay other career opportunities, cause anxiety, and occasionally result in heartbreak should repeated attempts fail. Youth is a critical period for the development of skills, business, or study of specific professions.Critics contend that the UPSC test filters talent that would have otherwise been more creatively and dynamically beneficial for the economy.Many candidates discounted other career paths—engineering positions, private sector employment, higher education—only to find themselves caught in an endless cycle of test trying. 2. Said Red Tape and Corrosion Long-standing View of Corruption: Popular culture (and occasionally actual life) presents the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) as a means of influence peddling and unfair gain-oriented vehicle. Although not every bureaucrat is dishonest, scandals involving IAS officials are often publicized and help to create the impression that the institution is prone to corruption overall.Critics contend that the system's inherent colonial era rigidity lacks strong defences against corruption. Red Tape Culture: One often heard refrain is that India's bureaucratic system moves slowly. Hierarchical decision-making, several approvals, and layers of documentation can all impede efficiency and hinder creativity.Many times, procedural flaws and lack of responsibility cause public complaints to be unanswered for several months. 3. Restricted Permanence and Responsibility Public responsibility against job security• Job security is a trademark of government employment; once an officer passes the tests and their probationary term, they are seldom removed. Job stability can cause complacency even while it shields officials from political demands.Why Often ambiguous performance criteria for assessing federal officials make it challenging to hold underperformers responsible. Critics contend that given the lack of immediate repercussions for inadequate performance, this "permanent" status might foster hubris or indifference.Policy implementations may deteriorate in an atmosphere where nobody is clearly held responsible for mistakes. People who experience long wait periods and difficult procedures for simple activities like getting licenses, ration cards, or official documentation start to lose public confidence in government services. 4. Effect on Public Trust and Government IntegrityMany gifted and idealistic young people who join the civil services finally depart disappointed, claiming corruption, a lack of creativity, or the bureaucratic maze that prevents real development.This flight of brilliant brains hurts government systems and erodes public confidence in the capacity of civil servants to bring about actual transformation.