Articles
Toddy regulation in Kerala: Need for liberalised policies
August 21, 2024
EP 08 | Policy Beyond Mobility | The First And Last Mile Disconnect In Public Transport In Indian Cities
August 23, 2024Lateral Entry in Civil Services: Navigating the Controversies and Challenges
This article analyses the recent move of UPSC to recruit senior officers of bureaucracy through ‘lateral entry’. The government dropped the move in the wake of organised protests by the opposition parties and dissent by a couple of NDA-allies. Highlights are:
- Many developed countries have implemented lateral entry in their civil services. In India, the induction of eminent personalities/specialists in the government has been common since the days of Pandit Nehru.
- The various Committees which examined UPSC’s recruitment process to civil services recommended the need to induct more professionally competent persons. The second Administrative Reforms Commission of 2005 specifically recommended lateral entry into civil services.
- A surcharged socio-political scenario in the country with overriding slogans on caste-census, caste-quota etc. with a clear political or electoral agenda led to the present controversy on the lateral entry process, which started in 2018.
- The tendency to sabotage policies or reforms like ‘lateral entry’ meant to tune up governance and meet new challenges in the nation-building endeavours needs to be dispensed with.
- The need of the hour is the formulation of new guidelines/procedures in the ‘lateral entry recruitment process’ fully complying with the constitutional provisions, principles of social justice and reservation norms.
The recent advertisement of the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) for the lateral entry recruitment in bureaucracy has stirred up the hornet’s nest in political and administrative circles. The opposition parties were in arms calling lateral entry a ploy to deny reservation benefits to disadvantaged groups. A couple of NDA- allies too came out against it. Ultimately, the Government decided not to go ahead with the move, reiterating its commitment to the principles of social justice. Thus, the UPSC withdrew the advertisement.
It is the right time to make an introspection on the entire issue. The concept of lateral entry to civil services is not a new phenomenon. Almost all developed countries, in one way or another, had introduced it in their civil service set-up. In the United Kingdom, experience gained in both the civil service and the private sector is considered when appointments are made. In the USA also, private intellectuals are inducted into high posts which is known as the ‘spoils system’. Such arrangements had, at times, created internal issues in prestigious outfits like the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) or the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) at the functional level. Ali Soufan, the FBI agent and co-author of ‘The Black Banners’ had made many references to this effect.
Perhaps, the situation was not different in India too. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, described as the architect of modern India, was always keen to induct professionally competent persons into civil service during the initial phase of nation-building. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, the ‘Iron Man of India’ described the civil servants as ‘the steel frame of India’ and the executors of the policies of the government – ‘a pillar on which the wheel of governance that churns policies and programmes of the country.’ Naturally, those capable of effectively controlling the wheels of governance, from within the civil service and outside, found due place in their set-up.
The Nehru-Patel legacy in the civil service/ governance was followed up with the UPSC playing a key role in the recruitment of civil servants. Several Committees headed by Kothari (1976), Satish Chandra (1989), Y.K. Alagh (2001), Surinder Nath (2003), Hota (2004), S.K. Khanna (2011), Nigavekar (2011) and Baswan (2016) examined the recruitment process to civil services. They emphasised the need for inducting more professionally competent persons. The Surinder Nath, Hota and Baswan committees specifically recommended ‘lateral entry’ for improving the quality of civil services. In 2005, the second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) headed by Congress leader Veerappa Moily recommended an institutionalized, transparent process for lateral entry at both the Central and state levels. The 6th Central Pay Commission (2013) and Niti Aayog, had also made recommendations on similar lines.
Keeping aside the present political controversy, the successive governments were keen to induct eminent personalities and specialists into government services. Dr Manmohan Singh, the former Prime Minister was appointed as an advisor to the Ministry of Foreign Trade and later became Chief Economic Adviser in the Ministry of Finance and then Secretary in the Finance Ministry. Sam Pitroda, Montek Singh Ahluwalia, Nandan Nilekani, Vijay Kelkar, Arvind Subramanian, Raghuram Rajan and Krishnaswamy Kasturirangan are all cases in point. No doubt, their expertise in various fields such as Information Technology (IT), Economics/ Finance/ Planning, Space Technology etc. has considerably contributed to our advancement in those fields. Shashi Tharoor-led Parliamentary Standing Committee in 2016 endorsed such moves through its recommendation for the expansion of the pool of applicants for the posts of ambassadors and high commissioners to beyond officers of the Indian Foreign Service and invite “eminent persons who have excelled in the field of community affairs, diaspora issues, foreign policy, area studies, literature, journalism etc’.
Since long, such policies were followed not in the case of eminent personalities alone, but in certain special/specialised agencies/ organisations. Rigorous reservation norms were not adhered to in many such establishments. Decades ago, a large number of persons were inducted as ‘Officers on Special Duties’(OSDs) to a highly sensitive organisation. Not only were reservation norms flouted, but the basic requirements for the posts were also compromised. Subsequently, the issue developed into a major controversy within the organisation, leading to the intervention of a former Prime Minister!
Similarly, deputation to various organisations/ departments is an established process in civil services. In most organisations, the reservation norms are not adhered to in deputation posts which normally are at higher echelons of bureaucracy. Though the deputation tenure is fixed as 3 years with a ‘cooling period’ (for subsequent deputation assignments), such norms are not strictly imposed. In many cases, officers proceed on deputation on various grounds, continue or otherwise, more on their personal interests than the overall interests of the Agency or the department concerned. In a nutshell, such ad-hoc administrative practices do not contribute much to improving governance.
The induction through the lateral entry process is for three to five years, almost on the lines of deputation as discussed above. The normal reservation norms are not applied to these positions, treated as ‘specialist’- ‘single cadre’ posts. The initial circular issued by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) in August 2018 underlined that this move is intended to ‘open up senior-level bureaucratic posts in several departments to the private sector individuals who are “talented and motivated” and willing to contribute in nation building. The expertise in various fields is the main criterion for selection. Since then, 57 officers have been recruited through lateral entry.
The pertinent question is why so much controversy on the present recruitment move? The answer is simple. Even the best reforms or policies would become collateral damage in dominating political interests/ battles. Over the last few years, the social and political spectrum in the country has been filled with emotional slogans such as caste-census, caste-quota etc, with a clear political or electoral agenda. Their ripples have clearly reflected in the 2024 Lok Sabha polls. Thus, the political parties, both winners and losers of the electoral battle, are vying with each other to win the support of such subaltern groups in future elections. The recent recommendation of the Supreme Court for the introduction of creamy layer concept in quotas for SCs/STs has given further impetus to such campaigns/ propaganda. The irony is that political parties which profess mundane concepts of an egalitarian society ensuring equality, and social and economic justice close their eyes towards such revolutionary decisions from the part of the judiciary!
The reality is that sabotaging such decisions or reforms like ‘lateral entry’ would retard the process of nation-building and elevating the nation to the status of a developed country by 2047. The DoPT, as early as in 2018, specifically highlighted the various reasons and real intentions of the lateral entry concept. These included: Shortfall of Civil Service officers, inadequate training facilities, lack of expert knowledge for new recruits, complexities and challenges in the areas of governance, law and order, developing economy etc. Thus, the need for new personnel with prior knowledge, expertise, skills, experience and ideas is essential to effectively tackle such challenges. Such personnel are vital for dealing with different domains like environment, energy, robotics, Artificial intelligence (AI), crypto-currency, cybernetics, money laundering, tax evasion etc.
The process of selection is equally important. The apprehensions from many corners that lateral entry is intended to fill higher echelons of bureaucracy with ‘vested interests’ cannot be fully ruled out. As of now, the selection is conducted by UPSC which is a constitutional body with a high degree of transparency and fairness. It is equally important to ensure the integrity and reputation of this constitutional body. It is salutary to note that the government would be reviewing the entire ‘lateral entry concept’ to formulate new guidelines in this recruitment process fully complying with the constitutional provisions, principles of social justice and reservation norms.
Views expressed by the author are personal and need not reflect or represent the views of the Centre for Public Policy Research.
K V Thomas is Senior Fellow at CPPR. He has over 36 years of distinguished service in the Intelligence Bureau (Ministry of Home Affairs) of India where he rose to become the Associate Director. He can be contacted at [email protected]
