1.1        Military Engineer Services (MES) is the oldest and largest Govt construction organisation in the country. This organisation does not have a separate Head and Engineer-in-Chief (E-in-C) who is the head of the Corps of Engineers of Army has been entrusted the job of heading the MES.

1.2        MES is a composite organization manned mainly by civilians and a small fraction by Military personnel but the management is placed in the hands of Military officers. It was entrusted to Military officers due to historical reasons and also because in the past civilian officers in the higher position were considered not required to construct and maintain temporary structures like Barracks and Stores. However, this position has now completely changed. However MES is being headed by the part time head.

1.3           MES is now spread all over the country and it works at all terrains from border areas to remote areas, high altitude areas to uncongenial climate areas and rural areas to field areas. Its annual work load of Rs 12,000 crore is much more than that of CPWD which is about Rs 10,000 crore. CPWD headed by a Secretary level officer of their own cadre, works under an exclusive Ministry. However, MES the largest organization persists with a dubious distinction of dual charge.

1.4        MES has been functioning as a captive organisation with captive client just an adjunct of the Army as if it is of the Army, by the Army and for the Army. Military officers are posted with higher responsibilities, nature of duties and power as compared to their civilian counterparts to keep the civilians as subservient and consequently, the civilian participation in the management of the department is very negligible. MES is the only department where in its own organized cadre is barred from heading the organization.

1.5        E-in-C being a Principal Staff Officer (PSO) reports to Chief of Army Staff as head of Corps of Engineers  and not as head of MES. COAS is not in the chain of command of MES as all works and personnel matters are dealt directly by MoD. However, as head of both MES and Corps of Engineers, E-in-C is expected to report to two authorities namely MoD and COAS in his dual responsibilities. This is not a healthy system and has been causing command and control problems in MES.

1.6        Over the years, the synergy between MES and its Users has become rather weak and the Users have been pulling away from MES by their attempt to have their own works complement under their own control sacrificing the organisational strength which MES possesses. Some such adventures have proved to be highly unsuccessful which is evident from the performance of CCE (NEP/Army) projects and MAP projects.

1.7        MES has grown manifold over the decades. The service, with the part time head and the management vested with the military officers who lack works experience is showing signs of sluggishness and unmanageability. This arrangement was made in 1923 when it was hardly 4% of its present size and mainly manned by Military personnel, when only the Army was to be provided the works services. The present scenario is entirely different from that of past. The then arrangement of additional charge of MES to E-in-C had met the requirements in the past. However, today, in the context of the size of MES work force, its annual workload, the span of control of E-in-C as head of MES, the diversity and complexity of works and more demanding users, MES is in need of a separate head.