One of the main arguments against socialism and communism has always been that publicly-owned entities inevitably become very inefficient, and one of the primary reasons for this are that public companies are often very soft on poor employee performance. India's public sector is a perfect example, and if India wants to stay economically competitive, they need to do something about it.
A man was allowed to get away with absence from work for 24 years - there's hardly a question about whether the public sector is too lenient. If 24 years doesn't qualify as too lenient, I'm not sure what would. Of course, I'm sure we'd all like to have 24 years off work with full pay, but it doesn't speak very highly of the powers that be.
Because of corruption, ineffective regulation and limited accountability, the public sector in India, like most of the developing world, is too easy on its own. Mistakes are hardly penalized. And even if they are, the penalties are too weak to act as a deterrent for potential mistake-makers. Moreover, there is great degree of camaraderie amongst the bureaucracy and hence they hardly go after their own.
There are always loopholes in the system that every society will expose. When it gets to the tipping point, then someone will do something about it. If everyone in India could pull off not going to work for twenty four years, the would. Dig deeper and you'll find the same problems in your backyard.