Union Territories Civil Services (UTCS) 
The Department of Personnel and Training office memorandum, dated the 22nd July, 1993 (Annexure A) spells out the broad terms of reference for the Working Group. In the main, they seek identification of the training objectives with a view to balancing knowledge and skill with required attitudinal changes, particularly in the context of the economic liberalisation now under way. Enhancing administrative capabilities through training as a tool is also to be aimed at. The working Group has been charged with the responsibility of preparing a document on National Training Policy embodying these objectives.
As for the coverage of personnel, the memorandum refers to I employees' of Government. The Group has gone into the question of coverage. In the first place, a distinction has been made between the Civil Services on the one hand and the Public Services on the other. The latter includes Government employees, employees of the local-self government system, Public Sector Undertakings and other quasi-governmental organisations. Employees directly working under the Government, in our case both the Central Government and the State Government, have been chosen as the subject matter of our study. They can be designated as the Civil Services. It may, however, be noted that a large proportion of Government employees, those whose emoluments are paid from the State Exchequer, are teachers. The report does not cover them.
The desirability, and for that matter even feasibility, of our preparing a common Training Policy for the entire gamut of the Civil Services has been considered. The group feels that if the policy guidelines are to apply more or less equally to all levels and functional segments of the Civil Services, they must be so general as to have little operational value. On the other hand, if each level or functional segments of the system is left free to devise training policies entirely in the light of its own perception, it will promote some kind of a free-for-all situation. The strategy that this report outlines provides for a common thread of training objectives that binds together all organisations, services and functional groups of the governmental system. Yet they are left free to develop, according to their judgment, professional skills and competencies relevant to their respective functional area.
Some doubts have been expressed about the appropriateness of terming the outcome of our study as the National Training Policy. It is felt by some members that since the proposed training is not meant for the entire population but only for the Civil Services, such a nomenclature may be misleading. Perhaps all doubts on this score can be set at rest if the outcome of our report is entitled National Training Policy for the Civil Services.