On February 17, MLAs across the ruling and Opposition ranks in the Uttar Pradesh Assembly joined forces to raise the issue of “officials not responding to the phone calls of public representatives”, leading to Speaker Satish Mahana issuing fresh directions to the government to take necessary action in this regard.In the past two years, several separate detailed and follow-up orders have been issued, by the Principal Secretary and Chief Secretary, to ensure implementation of “due protocol” towards elected representatives by officials.AdvertisementWhile officials defend themselves telling The Indian Express that they are inundated by calls making requests, leading to delay in response, the MLAs, who say the problem is more at the district level, see a “deliberate purpose” in the “indifference”.Leader of the Opposition and senior Samajwadi Party leader Mata Prasad Pandey, who raised the issue in the Assembly first, says: “All that the MLAs want from the officials is, ‘Sun toh lo, karo na karo, aapka vivek hai. Lekin sun toh lo samasya logon ki (At least hear us out, at least listen to the problems of the people. Later, it is up to you to make a decision).”Pandey tells The Indian Express that the unanimous reaction in the House when he raised the matter showed that BJP MLAs were as aggrieved as legislators on the Opposition side.AdvertisementAgreeing, a BJP MLA says the party can’t ignore the issue as the Assembly elections approach. “Opposition members can get away by telling the people that officials don’t pick up their phones, don’t work. But the issue is bigger for us. Being in power, we cannot give this excuse. People will immediately scoff that in BJP rule, even its own MLAs don’t have a say.”A minister adds that they feel stonewalled especially in districts outside their constituencies. “In districts covered by our constituency or where we are in-charge, officials usually call back,” the minister says, warning that public confrontations with officials – some already seen in the recent past – could rise with the poll heat.Last year, Minister of State and BJP leader Pratibha Shukla staged a protest at a police station over an issue involving an official. But, a colleague says, “Despite this, the minister was not able to secure disciplinary action for the official.”During the Assembly discussion, Social Welfare Minister Asim Arun also lent his weight to the concerns, saying that some officials might be “sust, badtameez aur beimaan (slow, ill-mannered and dishonest)”. He suggested that MLAs be given a phone number at the district and state level where they can complain if their calls were not responded to.SP MLAs such as Sangram Singh and Ragini Sonkar have been vocal on the issue for some time, both inside the Assembly as well as outside. First-time MLA Sonkar, a doctor by profession, slams “the sense of supremacy and arrogance” among bureaucrats when it comes to legislators. “They may even get the work done otherwise, but if an MLA calls for the same, they make the party concerned sit for hours to punish them for making a call to us.”Giving an example, Sonkar talks about trying to help people in her constituency who were unaware of an Electricity Department scheme regarding pending power bills. “A BPL person approached me requesting if he could be given a day’s time to pay Rs 2,000… I called up the official concerned. He responded to me, but immediately called back the person to threaten him that he would be made to suffer for seeking my intervention. He told him, ‘Bijli bhi kategi aur FIR bhi karunga (Your power connection will be cut, and I will also file an FIR against you too)’. What kind of arrogance is this? Both the official and I are working for the public… And whether they like it or not, elected representatives are higher in the hierarchy as per the Constitution.”Sources in the government said that while there was an issue, it had to be cautious about taking action against officials based on MLAs’ complaints as, on coming to power in 2017, the BJP had made the previous Samajwadi Party government’s “excessive political interference in the administration” an issue.Leaders said the Yogi Adityanath government wants to project the image of a government in which “officials enjoy a relatively free hand”.However, Pandey argues that the government can’t ride two boats. “The solution is simple: strict directions have to come from the top that officials must at least listen to public representatives and citizens… But now it (the opposite) has become a habit, and there is little hope that the government will be able to change it drastically before the polls.”The Leader of the Opposition adds that officials take their cue from the top. “When governance becomes centralized and one-man driven, officers feel accountable only to the top leadership… The message to the public is that a vidhayaka matters little, and that only the karyapalika (Executive) does, which is dangerous for a democracy.”The problem is more acute now, in the BJP government’s second term, Pandey claims. “The power system has become highly centralized and authoritarian.”Speaker Mahana, who wrote to the government after the concerns expressed by the MLAs in the House, admits he has been getting “lots of complaints” about “a communication gap between public representatives and officials”. “Ultimately, accountability to the public rests with elected representatives… The issue is not merely picking up calls, it is important that all institutions in a democracy understand their boundaries and work accordingly.”In recent years, orders and reminders to officials in this regard have been issued in October of 2017, 2018 and 2019; March, November 2021; June 2022; February, April, August, October 2023; and January 2024, before Speaker Mahana’s latest directive.you may likeA June 14, 2022, directive, reiterated in 2023, noted that continued complaints of “non-responsiveness” were affecting governance. A January 5, 2024, order laid down that public representatives be formally invited to and honoured at official programmes.Pointing to orders being “issued repeatedly”, Mahana says: “The real question is, why is compliance not happening? Why did the need arise to issue 18-19 orders and reminders regarding protocol in the past decade or two?”According to Pandey, the order issued last year in this regard lapsed without much effect on the ground. “There was some improvement for a day or two, but no lasting change.”