The concept of civil service neutrality is a cornerstone of democratic governance. It implies that civil servants should serve the government of the day impartially, without political bias, and implement policies effectively regardless of their personal political affiliations. Key tenets include anonymity (civil servants work behind the scenes), impartiality (treating all citizens equally), and commitment to public interest. However, in the contemporary Indian context, the assertion that "the neutrality of civil service has become a myth" holds considerable weight, reflecting a complex interplay of political pressures and administrative realities.

Arguments Supporting the 'Myth' Assertion:

1. Politicization of Bureaucracy: A significant challenge is the increasing politicization of the bureaucracy. Civil servants are often perceived as aligning themselves with the ruling political party, either to secure favorable postings, promotions, or post-retirement benefits. This leads to a 'committed bureaucracy' that prioritizes the political agenda of the government over constitutional principles or public interest.
2. Frequent Transfers and Punitive Postings: Civil servants who are perceived as 'non-cooperative' or who stand up against political directives often face frequent and arbitrary transfers, or are given insignificant postings. This acts as a deterrent, forcing many to compromise their neutrality to avoid such consequences.
3. Post-Retirement Appointments: The lure of lucrative post-retirement appointments (e.g., as heads of commissions, tribunals, or even political offices) can influence civil servants to curry favor with the ruling dispensation during their active service, thereby compromising their impartiality.
4. Lack of Courage and Ethical Dilution: In an environment where political interference is rampant, some civil servants may lack the courage to provide frank and fearless advice or to resist unlawful political demands, leading to a dilution of ethical standards and a breakdown of the 'steel frame' ideal.
5. Influence of Personal Ideologies: While civil servants are expected to be neutral, their personal ideologies and beliefs can sometimes subtly influence their decision-making, especially in policy implementation, making absolute neutrality difficult to achieve.
6. Media Scrutiny and Public Perception: The intense media scrutiny and public discourse often highlight instances of civil servants acting in a partisan manner, further reinforcing the perception that neutrality is eroding.

Nuances and Counter-Arguments:

Despite these challenges, it would be an oversimplification to declare civil service neutrality an absolute myth. Many civil servants continue to uphold their constitutional duties with integrity and impartiality, often at personal cost. Institutional safeguards, such as constitutional provisions, service rules, and the training imparted at academies, still emphasize the importance of neutrality. The very existence of debates around this issue indicates that the ideal of neutrality remains a benchmark against which the civil service is judged.

In conclusion, while the ideal of civil service neutrality faces severe challenges and has been significantly eroded by political pressures and individual compromises, it has not entirely vanished. It is perhaps more accurate to say that its practice has become increasingly difficult and inconsistent, rather than a complete myth. The continuous struggle to uphold neutrality underscores its enduring importance for good governance and the health of Indian democracy.