Ethical concerns regarding Govt officials in coaching centers

It has come to the light that there are many government officials involves in private sector earning extra income by highlighting themself by becoming the face of some coaching centers and even some claiming why students should choose that particular coaching institutes for assured success while some running their own coaching centers as side business or involving in part-time teaching businesses but why..? is the government not paying them enough salary to make their ends meet or they don’t have any job to be performed in their respective departments, or they might be so good in managing work balance or who knows they don’t perform their duties at all because most of the time they will be busy preparing for topic to be taught or busy managing their business focusing on sales and marketing gimmicks so, is this even ethical ?? when it comes to the service they have committed for the nationbuilding through their service , there lies many questions to be as answered and why do we think that it should be checked and stop this practices by the concern department or higher ups to support that argument here are some reason to reasons
Conflict of Interest
Bureaucrats, especially those involved in government recruitment, education policies, or public administration, might have access to privileged information. If they teach at coaching centers, it could create unfair advantages for some students, leading to ethical dilemmas such as: Insider Advantage: If a bureaucrat has insights into examination trends, evaluation patterns, or recruitment policies, their students might have an unfair edge over others.
Influence on Exam Policies: If a bureaucrat has a say in policymaking related to recruitment exams, their teaching at a private institution could compromise impartiality.
Violation of Conduct Rules
The Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964, which apply to IAS, IPS, and other government officers, prohibit government servants from engaging in private employment or business without government approval. Specifically:Rule 15 states that no government servant can engage in any trade, business, or undertake additional employment without prior approval. Teaching at coaching centers for monetary benefits can fall under this rule.
Rule 16 also restricts public servants from accepting fees or earning profits from activities outside their official duties.
Thus, unless they have special permission, bureaucrats engaging in private coaching can be seen as a violation of these rules and this rule is applicable to state officials as well, basing on the rules the government of Nagaland has taken a major steps to enforce these conduct rules strictly. For instance, in August 2023, the government issued a directive giving in-service doctors to cease practicing in private hospitals and clinics. This move was in line with the Nagaland Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1968, emphasizing the prohibition of private practice without authorization.
Potential for Favoritism & Misuse of Authority
Some bureaucrats might indirectly promote specific coaching centers, creating an unfair business advantage, and which is happening at present by many officer at the rank of EAC.if coaching institutes highlight a bureaucrat’s name to attract students, it can undermine the principle of equal opportunity in public exams.
Impact on Public Service Ethics
Bureaucrats are expected to be fully dedicated to their official duties, and engaging in private coaching could divert their focus from governance.
Public servants are paid salaries from taxpayers’ money, and earning extra income through coaching might be seen as an ethical violation of their service commitment.
Exceptions & Alternative Perspectives
If a bureaucrat is teaching in a non-commercial, voluntary, or pro-bono manner (e.g., free online mentoring, government-run training programs), it may be considered ethical.and there are Some bureaucrats who take leave or resign from their services to legally engage in full-time coaching or educational work.
Conclusion
While legally restricted, the ethical argument against bureaucrats teaching at private coaching centers is stronger because it compromises fairness, transparency, and public trust in governance. However, if done within a permissible framework (such as government-approved training programs), it may be considered acceptable. Whereas Government servants in Nagaland are generally prohibited from engaging in private employment, including teaching at coaching centers, without prior approval. Such activities can lead to conflicts of interest and are viewed as contraventions of the established conduct rules. It’s essential for government employees to seek explicit permission before undertaking any additional employment to ensure compliance with these regulations.
Longshithung kikon.
Dimapur