27 October: the Citizens' Charter
Tuesday 27 October 2026
GS Paper 2 · 250 words · 15 marks
The Citizens' Charter has been a landmark initiative in ensuring citizen-centric administration. But it is yet to reach its full potential. Identify the factors hindering the realisation of its promise and suggest measures to overcome them.
(UPSC Mains 2024, GS Paper 2, Q16)
You have eleven minutes. Write your answer before you read anything below.
Open only after you have written
How to approach this question
The directive. There are two tasks. Identify the factors, then suggest measures. Give each about the same space. Make each measure answer a factor.
A shape that works in 250 words.
| Part | Words | What to write |
|---|---|---|
| Introduction | 35 | When India adopted charters, and what they do |
| Factors | 90 | Three or four, each under a heading |
| Measures | 95 | Three or four, each matched to a factor |
| Conclusion | 30 | The one change that matters most |
Material you can use.
| Fact | Source |
|---|---|
| UK Citizen's Charter | 1991 |
| India adopts Citizens' Charters | 1997, after a conference of Chief Ministers |
| Charters must be drawn up with citizens, and one size does not fit all | Second Administrative Reforms Commission, twelfth report, Citizen Centric Administration (2009) |
| First state law guaranteeing services in fixed time | Madhya Pradesh Public Services Guarantee Act, 2010 |
| Charter, grievance redress and service capability assessed together | Sevottam model, Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances |
| Online grievance portal | CPGRAMS |
Mistakes to avoid.
| Mistake | What to do instead |
|---|---|
| A long definition of the charter | One line, then the factors |
| Factors and measures that do not match | Pair them: no remedy, then legal backing |
| Ending on "political will" | End on one change with a cost for failure |
A model answer
India adopted Citizens' Charters in 1997, after a conference of Chief Ministers. The idea came from the UK's Citizen's Charter of 1991. Each charter sets service standards for an office. Four factors have kept charters from working.
Factors
Drafted without users. Many charters were written inside departments. Citizens were not consulted, and staff did not agree to the standards.
No remedy. A charter has no legal force. When a promise is broken, the citizen gets no compensation and no officer is held responsible.
Low awareness. Frontline staff and citizens often do not know the charter exists. Many charters are rarely revised.
One format for all. A uniform charter ignores the differences between a passport office and a village health centre.
Measures
Consult before drafting. The Second Administrative Reforms Commission's twelfth report (2009) said charters must be drawn up with citizens, and that one size does not fit all.
Give charters legal backing. Madhya Pradesh passed the first Public Services Guarantee Act in 2010, with time limits and penalties on officials. Other states have passed similar laws.
Link complaints to the charter. Every charter should name an officer and a time limit for complaints, connected to CPGRAMS.
Measure compliance. The Sevottam model assesses the charter, grievance redress and service capability together. Its results should be published and displayed in each office.
The weakest point is the lack of a remedy. A right-to-service law in every state, with penalties and published compliance data, would supply one.
Word count: 244.
| Where | What earns credit |
|---|---|
| Opening | Origin and purpose in three lines |
| Body | Four factors and four measures that answer them |
| Conclusion | One change, with a mechanism |