When V. Srinivas was appointed Rajasthan’s chief secretary last November, the reaction in the corridors of the secretariat was one of surprise. Few had expected the Centre to send the 1989 batch IAS officer back to the state at this stage of his career. Fewer still had imagined that, within months, the discussion would shift from why Srinivas to why not continue with him.
With his scheduled retirement due on August 31, the conversation in Jaipur’s bureaucracy had narrowed down to a single question: will Srinivas get an extension? While nothing has been decided officially, within administrative circles, the possibility is not being dismissed as mere speculation. There is even word that chief minister Bhajan Lal Sharma has sent his case for an extension.
Ironically, Srinivas had arrived on Rajasthan duties carrying significant disadvantage. Having spent almost half of his career on deputation with the Union government and on several national assignments, many questioned whether he possessed the local administrative instincts required in Rajasthan. The concern appeared reasonable. State administrations are as much about informal relationships as about rules.
For decades, Rajasthan has seen chief secretaries who largely confined themselves to the secretariat, exercising authority through files, reviews and meetings. Srinivas has tried to redefine that through greater visibility. He has been as much on the road as in the secretariat.
Srinivas has travelled across nearly two-thirds of Rajasthan’s 41 districts in barely eight months; visited villages far from used to seeing the state’s top bureaucrat; interacted directly with farmers, women’s self-help groups, industrialists and local officials; and documented much of it on social media without the stiffness usually associated with seniormost civil servants. The photographs of his tours that he uploads on social media reflect a style of administration that believes governance must be palpable on the ground.
That long stint in Delhi appears to have become one of Srinivas’s greatest strengths. Unlike many predecessors, Srinivas has leveraged his seniority and familiarity with the Union government to pursue Rajasthan’s projects aggressively. He routinely schedules one or two days every month in Delhi, often meeting a dozen or more Union secretaries in a single visit. Senior Rajasthan officials claim few chief secretaries have invested so much time in Centre-State coordination.
That sustained engagement has helped Rajasthan push several high-value projects. Yet administrative success in this state has rarely depended on Delhi alone. Perhaps Srinivas’s biggest achievement has been something far less measurable—the absence of turf wars.
Relations between the chief secretary and the chief minister’s office (CMO) have historically defined the efficiency of governance in Rajasthan. The officer heading the CMO invariably enjoys the chief minister’s full confidence. Unless the chief secretary shares that confidence, friction is inevitable. The recent past has demonstrated precisely that.
Srinivas’s predecessor Sudhansh Pant, a 1991 batch IAS officer who had been specially brought from the Centre after the BJP assumed office in the state in 2023, returned to Delhi before completing his tenure, reportedly following differences with the CMO. The fallout also saw additional chief secretary to the chief minister Shikhar Agrawal being shifted out.
Srinivas inherited that fractured administrative landscape. But instead of another institutional rivalry, an unusually smooth partnership developed between him and Akhil Arora, the officer now heading the CMO and someone trusted by three successive chief ministers. Their relationship appears collaborative—a rarity in Rajasthan’s administrative history. Better still, reveal insiders, the chief minister feels at ease with Srinivas as the face of the bureaucracy and Arora as the CMO deliverer.
Many officers privately acknowledge that the absence of competing power centres has improved government decision-making. Srinivas himself attributes much of his functioning to that equation. “No chief secretary can deliver without direction from the chief minister. I am privileged to have his guidance and active coordination and support from the CMO,” he told INDIA TODAY. He is equally generous in praising the state’s bureaucracy, arguing that several officers have performed exceptionally on difficult assignments.
That collegial style perhaps explains another aspect of Srinivas’s personality. Unlike the stereotypical oachable across levels. Junior bureaucrats rarely hesitate to walk into his office. That ease has created goodwill, although not without criticism.
Srinivas’s obsession with reviews is almost legendary. His weekly calendar often contains around 45 meetings, each lasting roughly three-quarters of an hour. More than a hundred state-level empowered committees meet every month under his watch. Some officers privately grumble that governance is increasingly becoming an endless cycle of presentations.
Srinivas disagrees. “Supervisory oversight is an important part of governance. Reviews are essential,” he says, invoking legendary Indian Civil Service officer A.D. Gorwala’s famous observation in the first report on Indian public administration—’What is not inspected is simply not done’.
Srinivas’s philosophy mirrors the administrative vocabulary popularised in Delhi over the past decade—digital governance, citizen-centric administration and continuous monitoring. He often speaks of translating Prime Minister Modi’s vision of ‘Maximum Governance, Minimum Government’ through the chief minister’s leadership.
Administratively, there is no shortage of potential successors. Additional chief secretary Abhay Kumar remains in contention and enjoys support in influential quarters. His batchmate Rajat Mishra, another senior officer currently on central deputation, could return if the Centre chooses. Akhil Arora’s name inevitably surfaces, though moving him immediately could disrupt the functioning of the CMO unless an amicable replacement comes in. His wife Aparna Arora, one of the state’s most experienced administrators who has handled tough departments, is another respected name in the reckoning.
Each presents a plausible option. Yet the argument favouring Srinivas is equally compelling. Governments are generally reluctant to alter a bureaucratic arrangement that appears to be functioning smoothly, particularly when a state has just little over two years before assembly elections.
That may not mean an extension is assured. Ultimately, the decision rests with the Union government and will involve considerations extending beyond governance. Seniority, succession planning, political and caste calculations and administrative priorities all enter the equation. But if extensions are granted to preserve momentum rather than merely reward longevity, Srinivas may have built a persuasive case.
Subscribe to India Today Magazine
– Ends
