The proposal to have an elected administration instead of an appointed administration raises significant questions about democratic governance in India. In the current system, elected representatives and ministers are in charge of government, while the administration works under their control and supervision.

In a democracy, the legislature exercises control over the administration. Administrative officers cannot act in violation of the policies adopted by the legislature. It is the responsibility of the ministers to retain political control over the administration. India has established a professional administrative system where civil servants are appointed based on merit.

If administrators were elected instead of appointed, they would be directly accountable to the people. This could make administration more people-friendly and responsive to citizens' needs. However, there are concerns about this approach. Elected administrators might focus on short-term populist measures rather than efficient governance.

The current appointed system ensures that civil servants are protected from political interference in the performance of their duties. They bring professional expertise and continuity to governance. The makers of our Constitution chose a parliamentary executive to ensure that the government remains sensitive to public expectations while maintaining professional administration.

Measures like the Right to Information can make bureaucracy more responsive and accountable without compromising administrative efficiency. Thus, the appointed administration with proper democratic control serves the interests of governance better.