The implementation of lateral entry has sparked serious concerns about social justice and the representation of marginalised groups in the Indian bureaucracy

The introduction of lateral appointments in India's bureaucracy has sparked intense debate, particularly due to the absence of reservations for Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), Other Backward Classes (OBC), and Economically Weaker Sections (EWS). The issue gained traction with a recent UPSC advertisement for 45 senior positions, which did not include the constitutionally mandated quotas, raising concerns about social justice and the representation of disadvantaged groups in high-level government roles.

The lateral entry system, introduced by the Modi government in 2018, was intended to enhance transparency and efficiency, addressing the opaque practices of previous administrations. However, the lack of provisions for reservations in this system has led to widespread criticism.

Rahul Gandhi, Leader of the Opposition, accused the NDA government of undermining the Constitution by excluding reservations from these appointments. He argued that this move was a direct attack on social justice, sidelining the underprivileged and diluting their representation in the higher echelons of bureaucracy. In response, Arjun Meghwal pointed out the Congress's past practices, highlighting the appointments of former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as Finance Secretary in 1971 and Montek Ahluwalia as Planning Commission Chairman without transparent procedures.

Since the inception of the lateral entry system in 2018, the government has received 6,077 applications, resulting in the appointment of 63 individuals to senior positions across various ministries, with approximately 35 from the private sector. While these appointments aim to bring in expertise and fresh perspectives, the exclusion of reservations has overshadowed the intended benefits. The backlog of vacancies in proportion to these 63 officials can only be addressed if the government creates new posts specifically for candidates from SC, ST, OBC, and EWS categories. The delay in amending recruitment rules has already caused significant harm, as many eligible candidates may have crossed the age limit.

The introduction of lateral appointments has been met with mixed reactions within the bureaucracy. While it brings in specialized knowledge and fresh perspectives, it also poses several risks to the traditional bureaucratic structure:

Impact on Bureaucracy: A Mixed Bag; the introduction of lateral appointments has been met with mixed reactions. While it brings in specialized knowledge and fresh perspectives, it also poses several risks to the traditional bureaucratic structure.

Demoralization of Bureaucracy: Traditional bureaucrats, who have risen through the ranks, may feel demoralized seeing lateral entrants appointed to senior positions without undergoing the rigorous training and years of service they have endured. This could lead to a perception that meritocracy is being undermined and create uncertainty regarding career progression.

Integration Challenges: Lateral entrants may struggle to integrate into the established bureaucratic culture, leading to friction with traditional bureaucrats.

3rd. Potential Conflicts of Interest: Lateral entrants from the private sector may face conflicts of interest, where their decisions could be influenced by their previous affiliations.

This raises concerns about policy bias and the potential prioritization of private sector interests over the public good. Accountability and Transparency Issues: Unlike career bureaucrats, lateral entrants might not undergo the same level of public scrutiny and evaluation, leading to concerns about transparency in decision-making. Their lack of deep institutional knowledge could also affect the quality of their decisions, especially in complex policy areas. Impact on Administrative Cohesion: The introduction of lateral entrants at senior levels could fragment authority within the bureaucracy, leading to inefficiencies and delays.

Positive Takeaways:

 Lateral entry into senior government positions offers several benefits:

Expertise Infusion: Brings specialized knowledge from various sectors, enhancing policy-making.

Diverse Perspectives: Introduces new viewpoints, fostering innovative solutions.

Increased Efficiency: Private sector professionals bring a focus on perfomance and efficiency.

Skill Gap Bridging: Addresses deficiencies in areas like technology and finance. Meritocracy Promotion: Emphasizes skills over seniority, potentially improving leadership quality.

Governance Flexibility: Allows for quick adaptation to new challenges with experienced professionals.

Public-Private Collaboration: Strengthens ties between government and private sectors.

(The writer has been ex chairperson of Standing Committee of All State Public service Commissions in India and former chairman of HP Public Service Commission; views are personal)