Uni-'lateral' entry?

Indian polity requires a nuanced view on lateral entry, which encompasses social justice.

It is important to understand the Congress party’s nuanced view on lateral entry in the present socio-political context, where unprecedented unemployment and unimaginable inequality are hampering the cause of social justice.

The society, state and the market must work in alignment for meaningful change to take place. The dynamics between the three sometimes open the Overton window for reform and sometimes one of the three reacts more to the reality of the circumstances and overshadows the other, to fold up the Overton window. India is sitting on a ticking bomb of joblessness. Every second youth in India is unemployed. Economic inequality has widened to a 100-year high. Society is in an upheaval, with more and more caste groups demanding affirmative action and a caste census is now practically a nationwide demand. In these present circumstances, any kind of step which does not encompass reservation, guaranteed by the Constitution, especially in the context of high-level appointments in government jobs, is sure to be seen as a step against social justice and equality. The Congress party, the opposition and even the BJP allies understand this new dynamic and have therefore swiftly opposed any lateral entry that does not include social justice. The quick response by the Congress President to the lateral entry advertisement by the UPSC should be seen in this context. This forced the Modi government to roll back the order and make some belated noise about the PM’s vision of ‘Sabka Saath’ and social justice.

The Congress party indeed brought in the concept of lateral entry in 1957, through the “Industrial Management Pool (IMP)” initiative when 131 highly qualified experts from private and public sectors were hired in managerial roles in general management, finance, accounts, sales, and procurement areas. The scheme was a failure. Not only were recruits selected without considering the actual needs, but even when public sector companies required experienced professionals, they opted to retain traditional bureaucrats. Later in 1965, the first Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) pointed out the need for specialization recruitment.

From time to time, the Congress party has brought in lateral entrants, as domain experts. The biggest example is of Former Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh who was appointed an economic advisor in the Ministry of Commerce and Industry through a lateral entry in 1971. Sam Pitroda, Montek Singh Ahluwalia, Nandan Nilekani, Raghuram Rajan, and N K Singh are prominent examples that followed.

However, the Congress party’s opinion is that they are single person appointments involving domain experts, required for specific tasks. Nandan Nilekani was required to roll out AADHAAR, so he was made the UIDAI chairman. Montek Singh Ahluwalia was part of the IMF before taking over his role as the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission and Raghuram Rajan was again, part of the IMF, before becoming the Governor of the RBI.

These specific positions did not require any reservation, but if the government through the UPSC is bringing in a policy of lateral entry to appoint 45 mid-level officers from the private sector into joint secretary/director/deputy secretary-level posts in the government, then the norms of appointment need to be followed.  Department of Personnel and Training’s (DoPT) own rules say that government appointments are exempt from reservation only if they are temporary, for a period less than 45 days.

Critics of the present system of the lateral entry scheme have some pertinent points. First, if the government doesn't implement reservation policies, it should consider hiring consultants instead of filling government posts. Second, serving officers questioned the fairness of promoting private sector hires to senior positions while they remained in lower-level roles, thus negating impartial promotion. Third, the issue of accountability has also been raised, as it was unclear how the government would ensure accountability from individuals who would return to lucrative private sector jobs after a five-year stint in government.

Many factors led to the demand for a more ‘open’ system and a push for lateral entry. First, economic reforms in 1991 and the change in the nature of the administration. Second, the sudden leap of IAS officers’ social compatriots — graduates of IITs & IIMs in terms of both pay and perquisites, as well as efficiency and expertise. Third, the increase in rent-seeking tendencies of civil servants, thereof. Fourth, the political class and the society collectively blame all administrative deficiencies on the civil servants. Fifth, a genuine need for specialization with more technological advancement.

But, in the present reality, where rising economic inequality and social fissures have fuelled caste identity to take centre stage in India’s body politic, and where acute scarcity of government jobs has resulted in widespread despair among our youth – a blanket announcement to fill senior government positions without social justice is unimplementable. After, all politics is all about pragmatism.

Rachit Seth is the founder of ‘Policy Briefcase'. The views expressed are personal. He tweets at @rachitseth.