UPSC Limits Repeat Attempts by Serving Officers: Why the Reform Is Tough but Necessary

The Union Public Service Commission (Union Public Service Commission) has drawn a firm line on repeat appearances in the Civil Services Examination (CSE) by already-selected officers, triggering intense debate within India’s aspirant ecosystem and bureaucracy. The reform, announced through the latest notification, seeks to address long-standing concerns around fairness, efficiency and the misuse of public resources.

Under the revised framework, officers from elite services such as the IAS and IFS will now be required to resign before reappearing for the examination. Those allocated to the IPS or other Group A central services will be permitted only one improvement attempt. Any further attempt will require resignation from service. For thousands of fresh aspirants preparing in hubs like Mukherjee Nagar, this change is being seen as a long-overdue correction.

For years, the system allowed selected officers—especially those outside the IAS and IFS—to continue appearing for the CSE in pursuit of “better” services or preferred cadres. While legal, the practice had unintended consequences. Seats effectively recycled through the same candidates reduced opportunities for first-time aspirants. At the same time, officers preparing again either took extended leave or worked with divided focus, affecting administrative efficiency.

Mentors and policy observers argue that the cost was not merely competitive imbalance. Training officers, paying salaries, and leaving sanctioned posts vacant imposed a financial and institutional burden on the state. Public money was being spent on individuals who were, in many cases, already planning their exit in search of higher-ranked services.

The reform also exposes deeper inter-service power dynamics. Within India’s bureaucratic hierarchy, the IAS has long occupied an unquestioned apex, offering greater authority, visibility and access to top constitutional and administrative posts. This imbalance has fuelled repeated attempts by officers from other services, reinforcing a perception that anything short of the IAS is a compromise rather than a career.

Over time, service academies attempted to curb the trend informally by tightening leave rules. Officers responded by seeking extraordinary leave, medical exemptions or legal relief, often successfully. In the absence of a clear rule from the UPSC, institutions struggled to contain the practice. The new regulation finally closes that gap.

Supporters of the move say it redefines the meaning of public service. By forcing candidates to choose between the service they already hold and the one they aspire to, the UPSC is signalling that entry into the civil services is not a provisional arrangement. It is a commitment. The reform is also expected to improve productivity by ensuring that officers in service are fully invested in their roles.

Critics, however, point out that hierarchy and prestige politics within the bureaucracy remain unresolved. The reform may reduce repeat attempts, but it does not automatically equalise authority or career progression across services. Still, few dispute that the decision addresses a structural distortion that had persisted for decades.

For aspirants and administrators alike, the change represents a rare moment of institutional introspection. It may not transform the system overnight, but it resets expectations—of fairness, accountability and purpose—at the heart of India’s most competitive examination.