It may seem premature to judge the Narendra Modi government right now. But we can look at the straws in the wind. Modi built an awesome reputation through his rhetoric, repartee, record of achievements in Gujarat, his ability to reach out to the the masses and showed himself to be fully prepared for being the Prime Minister of India in the run up to the elections earlier this year. He had a circle of home-grown and NRI intellectuals and retired civil servants as advisors. He seemed well-briefed, with a reputation for being a good listener, a quick study, a voracious reader and as a determined implementer of policies.

From the first day in office, Prime Minister Modi laid down rules for his ministers. They are not to talk freely and at will to the media. Their personal staff must not be related to or very close to them. Appointment of their senior officers would be approved by the Prime Minister?s Office. After early missteps, ministers now are rarely heard, even seen.

But he has not yet filled key ministries. Defence and corporate affairs have both been put under the charge of an overloaded finance minister. The government?s first Budget?presented 45 days after taking office?did not signal any major reform. It was pedestrian in presentation and had no overarching vision.

The Budget did not drop the retrospective taxation that has harmed India?s image. The finance minister, though, did express his distaste for it in later interviews. The creation of the Entrepreneur Fund, of R10,000 crore, was a good move. However, it could have been indicated that this would not be another government bonanza for a favoured few by saying it would be run independently, not by bureaucrats and politicians. For a government that foisted employment growth as a major pre-election promise, the Budget did not have measures to stimulate cottage industries, the fastest employment generators with the largest potential. FDI caps were raised in defence and insurance but the government did not allow the foreign investor management control over the joint enterprises. High technology defence manufacture to base in India needs it. Indians working in such enterprises will absorb the technology. With manufacturing on Indian soil, it is Indian.

It was expected that Modi would induct many experts into the government. Manmohan Singh in 1991, as finance minister, inducted many at the outset. This helped his measures to move fast. Modi has not done so, except for appointing secretaries in the Prime Minister?s Office and other secretaries. Arun Jaitley does not even have Economic Advisors, only bureaucrats. No wonder that both the Budget and the Budget speech were so dense and unexciting.

Modi could have ignored political affiliations and, for instance, re-inducted the creator of Aadhaar to move it forward. The Direct Benefit Transfer is a vital ingredient of any attempt to control expenditures and make them meaningful, and needs Aadhaar to be powered through. Modi missed the chance to appoint sectoral experts to key ministries choosing instead politicians with little high-level administrative experience.

From his speeches and interviews, we expected immediate and major administrative reforms. These are urgently needed to ensure individual accountability of officers. We must have severe penalties on government servants for misbehaviour, and incentives for performers, laying down target outcomes for each officer and measuring achievement against these. The many reports of Administrative Reforms Commissions over the years must be implemented, too. There are similar reports by more than one Police Commission on restructuring the police force. The intelligence agencies need better coordination and leadership. All action so far is Modi?s initial moves to encourage the bureaucracy to be free and frank and to be at work on time. Full-fledged administrative reforms do not require legislative change to introduce them. Nor need they have taken months to be introduced.

A key concern about this government is something it has inherited from the Congress which had an active extra-constitutional authority in Sonia Gandhi, appointing all senior bureaucrats and every minister, and controlling and passing all major decisions. The Modi government has one in the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Thus, all major ministerial appointments and decisions are approved by the RSS.

The RSS stopped progress on the testing and introduction of genetically-modified seeds for food crops. The RSS apparently has a ?swadeshi? objection to it. The new Gujarat government has issued directions to revise school textbooks and incorporate antediluvian stories about India?s so-called ancient achievements in science and technology.

A few RSS functionaries are to be inducted into ministries. Presumably, they can keep RSS informed and bring the RSS view into important decisions. This contradicts expectation that Modi, like Atal Bihari Vajpayee, would be too independent to allow himself to be ruled by an external agency. One can only hope that he is biding his time and will be his own man and act according to his own intellect and convictions.

Modi?s vacillation and a bad compromise with agitating ?students? against the UPSC?s examination system only devalues the tests. The agitation really targets tests in English and of basic analytical skills. It opens the door to a revival of the anti-Hindi agitation that almost broke the country apart a few decades ago. This government has ministers who are mostly Hindi-speaking. They strike no chords in the non-Hindi speaking regions, especially the South. The government quickly withdrew a foolish Rajnath Singh-led home ministry directive that all officers must use Hindi on social media. But dominated by Hindi-speaking states, the government has succumbed to pressure from North India and devalued the UPSC tests. We can expect them to go further in the pro-Hindi stance and for reactions to follow in non-Hindi states.

The early indicators do not suggest that in discarding the UPA so decisively, India is getting anything different.

The author is former director general, NCAER, and was the first chairman of the CERC