The Inegalitarian Regime of NFS (Not Found Suitable) and Discriminatory Lateral Entry | Amit Kumar

A new phrase is getting traction in the academic circle, politics, and the de facto category of ’Not Found Suitable (NFS)’ in Indian universities across India. Indian academics are known for their brutal discriminatory practices in the interview and the selection processes in order to deprive and discriminate against the candidates belonging to the reserved classes in the name of dubious concepts like merit, objectivity, and institutional independence’ ever since the public money funds these institutions. In the last few weeks, NDA ally Apna Dal supremo Anupriya Patel made the news headlines by writing a letter to the UP CM regarding the discriminatory practices of NFS, which is intentionally and indiscriminately restricting the entry of candidates from marginalized sections in public services.

The shocking report regarding NFS comes from a premier institution in India, JNU. The confidential report of the Minutes of the 318th Meeting of Executive Council (Emergency) held on July 26, 2024, online reveals the appalling practices of NFS by the selection panel, in which most of the reserved backlog seats have been declared NFS in all categories of posts. It is a mockery of the so-called most inclusive campus in India, which is JNU. Of all 14 seats in all cadres’ posts of Professor, Associate Professor, and Assistant Professor, 9 are declared ’Not Found Suitable.’ Of these 9 ’Not Found Suitable,’ 8 candidates belong to the marginalized sections, either ’OBCs or SCs.’ Only 1 ’Not Found Suitable’ is in the UR category.  

It is a mockery of the constitutional principle of social justice that despite the constitutional guarantee of reservation in the public services for the SCs, STs, and OBCs, which are rhetorically highlighted, the reality check of the same is heartening, and the ’de-reservation of these reserved posts’ is going on without filling the backlog vacancies. NFS, a newly created category by the public universities to deprive the marginalized sections of society from entering public spaces.

In a report presented to the Union Parliament in 2021, around 50 % of the posts reserved for the OBCs, SCs, and STs in ten public universities remained vacant while UR (Unreserved Seats) were filled. Moreover, the faculty positions for the OBCs, SCs, and STs are lying unoccupied in prestigious higher educational institutions, including central universities, IITs, and IIM, for instance, private universities. The reason cited for the non-selection of these candidates is the absence of a suitable candidate. A crude example of this trend of exclusionary practices is that the UGC recently issued guidelines outlining the circumstances in which the reserve posts for the OBCs, SCs, are deserved or un-reserved, but due to public protest, this notification was withdrawn by the UGC. What is the relevance and use of this constitutional recognition of the right of representation if these universities can keep these posts vacant for many years in the name of merit and ’Not Found Suitable’? Does not it raise the question that the elitist Indian education system is depriving these candidates of ’legitimate expectation of constitutional morality’?

What does this divide between the constitutional principle of social justice of representation and the practice of not selecting the candidates from marginalized sections in the new name of merit that NFS (Not Found Suitable) tells us? It tells us the broader issue about the Indian education system and its unrepresentative and inegalitarian character. A similar inference can be derived in all sectors of the state. The bureaucracy and judiciary are also the best examples of the inegalitarian and arbitrary nature of the organs of the state. At the level of practice of representative democracy, the revolution in the domain of electoral politics is not reflected, and arbitrary and discriminatory practices of not selecting candidates from the marginalized sections are unabated. This shows the inequitable nature of Indian states as well as the education system, which recognizes the privileges of certain classes of citizens as inherent merit and people from the marginalized sections as meritless, while both are the result of constructed reality and materiality.

The data shows that the seats reserved for the reserved classes of the candidates are intentionally de-reserved after not filling the vacancies in the name of ’Not Found Suitable (NFS). It is a severe blow to the constitutional scheme of social justice of representative and substantive justice. It is also true that in a few cases of open category (UR), the NFS candidates are found, but in most of the cases, the NFS is utilized for reserved category. What does it show? It shows two opposing characteristics of India’s education system and academics. First, the Indian education system, due to its inherent bias towards marginalized sections, failed to impart skilful education and qualification in order to make them eligible for appointment, and second, the control of the education system by the elitist class resulted in systemic discrimination in the interviews where egregious discrimination is practiced.
The practice of NFS becomes more discriminatory when small and large public institutions adopt discriminatory roaster systems, whether a 13-point roaster system, a 100-point roaster system, or a 200-point roaster system. According to the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), Government of India, the reservation system does not apply to the first three seats in 13 points roaster. Similarly, the reservation does not apply in case of single seat at the department level. The advertisement for DoPT for appointments through lateral entry by the UPSC is the same. The constitutional mandate of the reservation will not apply to the single seat if those seats are advertised for a single department. Hence, the constitutional mandate of affirmative action is violated, and the reserved category is deprived of its legitimate claim of adequate reservation. The dominance of upper-class academics and symbolic representation of marginalized academics in the selection panels and their prejudiced selection criteria and interview marks allocation are resulting in Not Found Suitable (NFS)—the Not Found Suitable further results in the backlog vacancies of the reserved categories. The backlog vacancies of reserved categories in a particular cadre or post are carried forward for the following year’s appointment. However, the following year’s appointment with backlog vacancies (carry forward rule) cannot go beyond the 50 % limit placed by the Supreme Court of India, resulting in the reduced seats reserved for the reserved categories.

The Union Public Service Commission has invited application for 45 posts through lateral entry at the higher level of bureaucracy. The INDIA alliance parties have rightly raised the issues of backdoor entry of selected persons form particular ideological backgrounds. The compromised position of institutional integrity is known to all of us. The appointments in all central universities and institutions are being done through supra-non state actors’ recommendations. The merit and objectivity are exceptions while ideological affiliations to RSS and allied institutions are becoming rule for entering the state apparatus. The background analysis of the heads of the UPSC, NTA, UGC, VCs etc are self-evident. If the candidates from marginalised sections are not towing before this state supported organisations, they are being excluded from entering in the public employment through NFS and lateral entry in name of expertise and experience. The so-called transparency and rules are eyewash since all central government’s appointments are made on the basis of recommendation of an obvious non-state actor RSS and its affiliates. Now this is becoming new de facto criteria of selection. The lateral entry will become more dangerous in future because it will give an easy entry of private sector actors in the state apparatus. The corporatisation and contractualization of the state will further shrink the space for the public sector and prospects of public jobs for the marginalised sections.

The egregious failure of the institutional democracy in India is that despite theoretical recognition of social justice and reservation, the governments and educational institutions have failed practically to ensure the constitution’s mandate of social justice at the execution level. The educational and public institutions are doing anti-constitutional activities despite receiving public funds and grants. Institutional autonomy and independence are becoming a pretext for floundering the constitutional provisions and moralities. The Not Found Suitable Category (NFS) and appointment through Lateral Entry are the most discriminatory and egregious category to deprive marginalized sections of their legitimate expectation to be represented in the state’s institutional structure. The long march for justice requires the political parties to make these poll issues and mobilization marginalized for these discriminatory policies and practices.

(Author: Amit Kumar, PhD Scholar, CSLG, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi)