The resignation of about 120 scientists and engineers from the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), including those associated with top missions such as Gaganyaan, Chandrayaan-3 and the LVM-3 launch vehicle, should ring alarm bells for those who care about the country’s strategic ambitions. The government, in its predictable bureaucratic fashion, has responded by making it harder for scientists working on critical projects to resign. The applications for resignation or voluntary retirement will henceforth require acceptance from New Delhi.
This is likely to make matters worsesince talent cannot be retained through restrictions. Creativity cannot be forced. It must be valued and adequately rewarded. ISRO has long been one of the country’s most respected scientific institutions, earning global admiration for accomplishing complex space missions at lower costs compared to what are incurred by many advanced space agencies. From the Mars Orbiter Mission to Chandrayaan-3, its scientists have repeatedly demonstrated extraordinary technical capabilities despite working on shoestring budgets.
However, the very institution that has become a symbol of India’s scientific prowess now appears to be facing a serious human resource crisis. On 14 July 2026, the Department of Space issued a memorandum restricting routine resignations and voluntary retirements for Group A scientific and technical personnel, making it mandatory for them to have their departures cleared by the Department. The Department has justified its new policy by arguing that the departure of experienced scientists is disrupting projects of national importance. That concern is legitimate.
Space programmes are not ordinary engineering projects. They require years of accumulated expertise, institutional memory and close coordination among multidisciplinary teams. When senior project directors and mission managers leave midway, replacing them is neither quick nor easy.
On the other hand, forcibly retaining scientists and engineers does not serve the purpose as these are intellectual pursuits where one cannot be forced to perform against wishes. Centralising approval of resignations may only delay some departures while it risks creating resentment among scientists who may feel trapped rather than motivated. It will also act as a deterrent for young scientists who might have a rethink before applying for or joining ISRO. In any modern knowledge-based organisation, employee commitment cannot be secured through bureaucratic barriers. Those are all red-tape behaviours of yesteryears which has died in the modern world. Rather, it would be wiser for the government to try and figure out the reasons for this mass migration. The emergence of India’s private space ecosystem is fast changing the landscape. As on date, there are over 400 space-tech startups in the country with a combined valuation of about US$ 8.4 billion. Government reforms have opened the sector to private participation where ambitious startups offer competitive salaries, flexible work environments, equity participation and faster career progression.
These companies may naturally seek experienced ISRO scientists to lead cutting-edge programmes. These scientists would also be highly coveted in other countries. Scientists moving between public and private sectors or to other shores is common in advanced economies and often benefits the broader ecosystem through knowledge transfer and innovation. However, the real question that needs to be answered immediately is why ISRO is unable to remain an attractive destination for many of its most experienced professionals. Compensation is only one part of the equation. Scientists often seek greater autonomy, faster decision-making, modern research infrastructure and, most importantly, recognition of their contributions, glory and opportunities to pursue ambitious technological challenges. It can be wagered high that there would be one too many Babus in ISRO who would be creating unnecessary hurdles at work. That is the general attitude we all experience with bureaucrats in India.
A thriving private space sector may not be a danger but ISRO is still critical to India’s national security and strategic independence in science and technology. ISRO initially was, as some may be aware, mandated originally to do core research in space science. This holds true especially at a time when India is entering an ambitious phase of space exploration, with Gaganyaan, advanced communication satellites, planetary missions and expanded commercial launch services on the horizon. These programmes demand continuity of expertise and stable leadership. Losing experienced scientific talent at such a critical juncture could weaken India’s momentum in an age of heightened global competition.
Lately, ISRO’s mandate seems to have changed to assisting India’s Defence Research & Development Organization (DRDO) for its missile launches. This subtle change of purpose may also be a reason for scientists interested in core research to look for other pastures. India spends roughly only 0.65 per cent of its GDP on research and development (R&D), far too low compared to China’s 2.6 per cent, South Korea’s 4.9 per cent and the US’s 3.5 per cent.
Those countries also have much higher GDP. If India truly aspires to become a developed nation, it has to scale up its expenditure on R&D and infrastructure to motivate its scientific community. In space research India’s spend seems to be only 0.04 to 0.05% of GDP. The other nations compared above have much higher research budgets. A government that is too eager to lap up every achievement of its scientific community must also do its bit to retain the country’s top talent and refrain from trying to hog all credits. The choice for India couldn’t be starker – treat scientists as assets and research as top priority or concede even more brain drain and failings in ambitious missions.