Lateral Entry in Civil Services – Balancing the Demands for ‘Specialists’ and the Imperatives of ‘Social Justice’ | K Gireesan & Jos Chathukulam

The practice of bringing domain experts into the government is not new to India. It is a fact that lateral entry could bring in fresh ideas, energy, talents, and diverse experiences into the bureaucracy that will augment the state capacities to meet the complex tasks and diverse challenges of governance and development. Lateral entry shall be visualised for gap filling, supplementing, and value addition to the system for a shorter period, rather than supplanting the top management in the state apparatus.

This article examines the practice of lateral entry in civil services in India by highlighting the recommendations made by different commissions/ reports. It also analyses the dynamics of balancing the demands for specialists and the imperatives of social justice in the operationalisation of lateral entry in civil services in the country.

Looking Backward

One of the pioneer attempts in this direction was made by the setting up of Industrial Management Pool in 1957. It resulted in the induction of several technocrats into some of the positions in the economic enterprises in public sector through a lateral entry. While discussing the problems encountered in filling the top management positions, it is viewed that ‘newcomers may bring in a fresh point of view and more varied and broader experience. Available men / women within the organisation may take time to grow up to the required job and the organisation cannot afford to wait’ (IIPA, 1962, 69).

The First Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC), constituted in the year 1966, recommended for appointment to technical posts at senior levels from outside the Government. It viewed that “Provision should be made for appointment to technical posts at the senior levels of persons of proved competence from universities and industrial and commercial concerns, etc., if the capabilities and expertise possessed by them are needed and are not available within the ranks of the Civil Service” (GoI, 1970, 76). It was also suggested that the selection shall be made by a committee presided by the Chairperson, UPSC. Significantly, the report did not specifically indicate the words ‘lateral entry’ while echoing the spirit of appointing experts from outside.

The Sixth Central Pay Commission, constituted in 2006 and chaired by Justice BN Srikrishna, recommended that “certain posts in Senior Administrative Grade (SAG) and Higher Administrative Grade (HAG) that requires technical or specialized expertise and not encadred in any of the services to be opened up for being filled by suitable officers within the Government as well as by outsiders on contract” (GoI, 2008). Regarding the selection for higher posts in future, it advocated for a ‘shift from career-based to post-based selection in the higher echelons of Government in order to get the best domain expertise’ (GoI, 2008).

The second ARC, constituted in 2005 with Sri. M Veerappa Moily as its Chairperson, viewed that ‘Rapid and fundamental changes are taking place in the country in terms of economic growth, urbanization, environmental degradation, technological change and increased local awareness and identity. The response time to adapt to these changes is much shorter than it used to be. As instruments of public service, civil servants have to be ready to manage such change’ (GoI, 2009, 274).

While exploring the diverse options of placement at the Higher Management level and highlighting the need for lateral entry, the second ARC commented that “lateral entry as done in the past on an ad hoc basis can hardly be considered a suitable model of manpower planning since the present incumbents in government departments tend to resist entry of outside talent and the whole process remains personality driven and inchoate. There is therefore a need to institutionalize the process of induction of outside talent into the government” (GoI, 2009, 292).

In order to ensure accountability of public services, the Second ARC recommended that ‘There is need to have a comprehensive in-depth assessment at important milestones in an officer’s career. The Commission viewed that these assessments should be carried out on completion of 14 years and 20 years of service. The first review at 14 years would primarily serve the purpose of apprising the public servant about his/her strengths and shortcomings for future advancement. The services of public servants who are found to be unfit after the second review at 20 years, should be discontinued’ (GoI, 2009, 298). It will be pertinent to examine whether this recommendation was put to action during the past and the details of its outcome.

The Second ARC recommended for allowing the civil servants to work outside the Government. It recommended that ‘deputation of civil servants shall be permitted to such private organisations that are engaged mainly in non-profit making activities’ (GoI, 2009, 294). In this context, it will be interesting to examine how many career bureaucrats have availed this provision during the past.

The Seventh Central Pay Commission, constituted in 2014 and chaired by Justice Ashok Kumar Mathur, did not make any specific recommendation about the lateral entry into the civil services in its report, unlike its predecessor. However, it recommended for a ‘revised formulation for lateral entry / resettlement of defences forces personnel in different entities, keeping in view the specific requirements of organisation to which such personnel will be absorbed’ (GoI, 2015).

NITI Aayog in a report recommended that ‘policy making is a specialized activity and it is essential that specialists be inducted into the system through lateral entry. Such entry will also have the beneficial side effect of bringing competition to the established career bureaucracy’ (GoI, 2017). It reiterated the significance of bringing specialists on three to five year contracts. It is viewed that ‘such a system will bring top talent and energy into the government and will lend new dynamism to the ministries’ (GoI, 2017).

The Issue and its Dynamics

Lateral entry has been in vogue in India for the last several decades. Even the appointment of Manmohan Singh, Varghese Kurian, Bimal Jalan, MS Swaminathan, Montek Singh Ahluwalia, etc. in key positions in the state apparatus may be viewed as lateral entry and none raised any objections then, due to their credentials, stature, and proven abilities. Once compiled, the list of lateral entrants to such key positions in the system could be much longer. The practice of lateral entry picked up momentum in 2017, following a report on civil services reforms by the NITI Aayog (GoI, 2017).

According to The Hindu Daily, about 63 posts have been filled through the lateral route since the year 2019. The UPSC recommended the appointment of 31 posts, combined figures of Joint Secretary/Director/Deputy Secretary in different Departments, for a period of three to five years. It was against the notification for 43 posts in the year 2019 and the remaining 12 posts became infructuous (Singh, 2024).

On 17 August 2014, the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) released an advertisement for lateral recruitment for 45 posts at the ranks of Joint Secretary, Director, and Deputy Secretary in different Ministries and Departments. And, most of them were single post in different Departments as indicated in the advertisement. Reservation in government jobs is implemented by following the roster system or quota by rotation as per the procedures laid down by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), Government of India. The roster system takes each Department as a single unit and not the Ministries. As per the extant rules and practices followed by the UPSC in the past, quota benefits are not applied for ‘single post’ recruitments.

The latest advertisement by the UPSC has attracted criticism primarily due to the ‘en masse recruitment’ to senior administrative positions like Joint Secretary to the Government, without following the roster system. As the advertisement came subsequent to the Supreme Court’s verdict on the sub-classification within the SCs and STs, it may have aggravated the concerns about such a move. It was reported as ‘openly snatching away the reservation for SCs, STs, and OBCs in government jobs’ (Singh, 2024). The advertisement for lateral entry was severely criticized as it was viewed ‘in direct conflict with the notion of social justice that just not only about equal opportunities, but also about equality in opportunities’ (Paswan, 2024). Several political leaders and academicians expressed their anxiety towards the bulk recruitment of lateral entry into the top decision-making positions citing possibilities of backdoor entry. Apprehensions were expressed relating the lateral entry in civil services as the replication of ‘The Spoils System’ and its variants practised in United States of America, China, and other countries. The Spoils System is viewed as ‘a co-operative games, with winners given by a simple game structure, and represented by a fixed number of political appointments’ (Gardner, 1987).

Following the criticisms from political parties from the opposition and ruling dispensations, academics, and others, the Union Minister for Personnel, Jitendra Singh, wrote to the Chairperson, UPSC on 20 August 2024 to cancel the advertisement. Subsequently, the advertisement for lateral entry was withdrawn by the UPSC. Though the issues may have subsided for the time being, it is pertinent to analyse the situation in order to strike a balance between the demands for specialists and the imperatives of social justice.

Moving Forward

University of Birmingham, as part of the research study on the 21st Century Public Servant, analysed how the public service workforce is changing and what further changes are needed to develop the effectiveness of public servants. It was reported that ‘the 21st Century Public Servant is expected to balance the roles as storyteller, resource weaver, system architect, navigator, networker, etc.’(Needham et. al., 2014; Mussagulova, 2020). It was also highlighted that in addition to the focus on technical skills, more varied and softer skills are needed to perform the role of a 21st Century Public Servant.

But, the authors could not find any specific study that analysed the efficiency, effectiveness, and impact of the lateral entry into the state apparatus so far. The importance of examining the tangible and intangible outcomes of such an important administrative reform cannot be ignored before moving forward to its dispensation or continuity by incorporating changes in the process.

Rather than looking at the lateral entry into civil services as a remedy to address the systemic issues and deficiencies, it shall be viewed as an opportunity to address the gaps of specialisation and professional expertise. In this context, balancing the demands of specialists and the imperatives of social justice becomes very significant. Only then, equal opportunities along with equality of opportunities, as enshrined in the Constitution of India, could be ensured in civil services. In addition, the suggestions made by the Second ARC for carrying out a comprehensive and in-depth assessment of civil servants at specific milestones of service, and, liberalising the provisions for interested civil servants to work outside the Government for a short period also shall be put to action. Such measures are essential for rejuvenation and empowerment of a civil servant to transform into ‘The 21st Century Indian Civil Servant’.

(Authors: Dr. K. Gireesan, Director, MIT School of Government, MIT World Peace University, Pune, Maharashtra. E-mail: gireesan.decentralisation[at]gmail.com ; Dr. Jos Chathukulam Is Former Professor, Ramakrishna Hegde Chair on Decentralisation and Development, Institute for Social and Economic Change (ISEC), Bengaluru, and Currently The Director, Centre for Rural Management (CRM), Kottayam, Kerala. E-mail: joschathukulam[at]gmail.com)

References

• Gardner, R. (1987). A Theory of Spoils System, Public Choice, 54 (2), 171-185. For details, please see, https://www.jstor.org/stable/30024781

• Government of India. (GoI). (1970). Recommendations and Conclusions of the Administrative Reforms Commission – A Compendium, New Delhi: The Administrative Reforms Commission (Secretariat). For details, please see, https://darpg.gov.in/sites/default/files/Compendium_FirstARC.pdf

• GoI. (2008). Report of the Sixth Central Pay Commission, 643-644.
• For details, please see, https://pensionersportal.gov.in/sixthcpc/paycommissionreport.pdf

• GoI. (2009). Report of the Administrative Reforms Commission – A Summary.
• For details, please see, https://darpg.gov.in/sites/default/files/Second_AR_Summary.pdf

• GoI. (2015). Report of the Seventh Central Pay Commission.
• For details, please see,
• https://doe.gov.in/files/cenetral-pay_document/7cpc_report_eng.pdf

• GoI. (2017). India – Three Year Action Agenda 2017-18 to 2019-20, New Delhi: NITI Aayog.
• For details, please see, https://www.niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2023-02/India_ActionAgenda.pdf

• Indian Institute of Public Administration (IIPA). (1962). The Industrial Management Pool – An Administrative Experiment, New Delhi: IIPA,.
• For details, please see, https://ia902909.us.archive.org/30/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.278248/2015.278248.The-Industrial.pdf

• Mussagulova, A. (2020). The Twenty First Century Public Servant : A Developing Country Perspective, The Palgrave Handbook of the Public Servant, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-03008-7_31-1

• Needham, C., Mangan, C., & Dickinson, H. (2014). The 21st century public service workforce: Eight lessons from the literature. Public Service Academy. Retrieved from: https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-social-sciences/public-service-academy/news-events/2014/twenty-first-century-public-servant--eight-lessons.pdf.

• Paswan, A.N. (2024). Lateral entry in UPSC will further distance marginalised from centres of power, The Indian Express, 22 August.
• For details, please see, https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/lateral-entry-upsc-distance-marginalised-centres-power-9525983/

• Singh, V. (2024). Why is lateral entry policy under scrutiny?, The Hindu, 25 August. For details, please see https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/why-is-lateral-entry-policy-under-scrutiny/article68562127.ece