 |
|
The recent advertisement by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) for lateral entry into the Indian bureaucracy has sparked a heated debate, with opposition parties vehemently criticizing the government's decision. This controversy surrounding lateral entry, a mechanism to recruit experienced individuals from outside the traditional civil service, raises critical questions about its impact on the Indian bureaucracy and its adherence to the principle of reservation. This essay will analyze the origins and rationale behind lateral entry, examine the arguments put forth by both the government and the opposition, and explore the legal and ethical complexities surrounding the issue.
The concept of lateral entry has its roots in the recommendations of the Second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) established in 2005. Chaired by Veerappa Moily, the ARC highlighted the need to recruit experts with specialized knowledge to fill specific roles within the bureaucracy, which traditionally relied on career bureaucrats from the All India Services and Central Civil Services. This idea gained further momentum in 2017 when the NITI Aayog, in its three-year Action Agenda, and the Sectoral Group of Secretaries (SGoS) on Governance, in their report, advocated for recruiting personnel from outside the All India Services for middle and senior management positions. The government, under the NDA, implemented the first lateral-entry recruitment in 2018, bringing in individuals from private companies, public sector utilities, and state governments.
The government argues that lateral entry is crucial to infuse fresh perspectives and specialized skills into the bureaucracy, particularly in areas like emerging technologies, semiconductors, and cybersecurity, where traditional bureaucrats may lack the necessary expertise. By bringing in domain experts, the government aims to improve efficiency and responsiveness to contemporary challenges. The lateral entry scheme allows for the recruitment of individuals with diverse backgrounds and experiences, potentially leading to a more dynamic and innovative bureaucracy. However, the opposition argues that lateral entry undermines the principles of reservation, which guarantees representation for Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC) in government jobs. They contend that lateral entry creates a parallel system that bypasses the traditional process of recruitment through the UPSC, thereby excluding SC, ST, and OBC candidates from these positions. The opposition also alleges that the lateral entry scheme is being used to bring in ideologically aligned individuals, further raising concerns about political influence within the bureaucracy.
The legality of lateral entry outside the ambit of reservation is based on the argument that these are single-cadre appointments, which are not subject to reservation. The government maintains that lateral entry fills specific, individual positions within a particular ministry, similar to the appointment of a bureaucrat to a department, where reservation doesn't apply. Additionally, the government argues that lateral-entry officers are a small pool for a short duration (up to 5 years), rendering reservation impractical. However, the opposition criticizes this reasoning, claiming that lateral entry effectively deprives SC, ST, and OBC candidates of opportunities in key positions, especially in the long run.
The controversy surrounding lateral entry highlights the complex interplay between meritocracy, representation, and political influence within the Indian bureaucracy. While lateral entry has the potential to bring in valuable expertise and address specific skill gaps, it raises concerns about its impact on the principle of reservation and the overall inclusivity of the bureaucracy. The government must carefully consider the potential benefits and drawbacks of lateral entry and ensure that it is implemented in a way that is both fair and transparent. Furthermore, the government must engage in constructive dialogue with the opposition and other stakeholders to address concerns regarding reservation and ensure that lateral entry does not exacerbate existing inequalities within the Indian bureaucracy.
Source: Lateral entry controversy: Five big questions answered