The central government’s advertisement dated August 17, inviting applications for recruitment to 45 positions — Joint Secretaries (10) and Directors/Deputy Secretaries (35) — triggered an intense debate amongst politicians, bureaucrats and others. The ad was, however, abruptly cancelled after an outcry against such appointments by Opposition parties and NDA allies.
The scheme, introduced in 2018, is known as ‘lateral entry’ to positions traditionally held by IAS officers. It is aimed at bringing “domain experts from the private sector into government departments at senior levels” to (a) infuse fresh talent and perspective into the bureaucracy, and (b) address the shortage of IAS officers in the central government. It is open to anyone working in the private sector or government departments, with 15 years of experience.
The main argument in favour of lateral entry is that it is a step towards modernising the civil services and making it more responsive to contemporary challenges by incorporating professionals with diverse experiences outside the traditional bureaucratic framework. The positions to be filled include domains ranging from emerging technologies, semiconductors and digital economy, to environmental policy and law, renewable energy and disaster management, which would require technical and professional knowledge. The contentions against the scheme include concerns that the system of recruitment lacks transparency and accountability and could lead to a ‘spoils system’ by inducting persons with the preferred ideology and loyalty to the government. Secondly, it could make way for persons without any experience in governance, who would find it difficult to adjust to the existing political and bureaucratic environment. Another criticism that has now cropped up is the one relating to social justice or the absence of reservations. In order to appreciate the different viewpoints, a brief historical background about the civil services in India would be useful.
The creation of a civil service for India was proposed by the Macaulay Committee in 1854, which emphasised the need for merit-based appointments at a time when patronage played a big part. Following this report, the Indian Civil Service (ICS) was established in 1858 and recruitment to the service was through a merit-based competitive examination.
After independence, the ICS was replaced by the IAS (Indian Administrative Service) and the system of merit-based competitive examination continued.
A major change in the composition of the civil service came with the introduction of reservations based on the principle of affirmative action. While initially, reservation was confined to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, it was extended to Other Backward Classes in 1991, and subsequently to EWS (economically weaker sections) and PWDs (persons with disabilities).
The current opposition to lateral entry stems essentially from the exclusion of reservations.
In a rare display of sensitivity, the government responded, reaffirming its faith in affirmative action: “For the Prime Minister, reservation in public employment is a cornerstone of our social justice framework, designed to address historical injustices and foster inclusion,” said Union Minister Jitendra Singh in a letter to Union Public Service Commission chairperson Preeti Sudan.
The lateral entry scheme is not new and had been resorted to much earlier. V Krishnamurthy, who turned around the fortunes of Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL) and other public sector undertakings, was inducted as Secretary in the Ministry of Industry in 1977 for his expertise in management. Economists like Manmohan Singh, Vijay Kelkar and Bimal Jalan functioned as Finance Secretaries.
However, for the first time, appointments are sought to be made at the level of Joint Secretaries and Directors/Deputy Secretaries annually, after calling for applications, prescribing qualifications and publishing a job description. This amounts to regular recruitment without following the prescribed service rules.
In the din and bustle on the merits and demerits of lateral entry, we seem to be missing the wood for the trees. The real issue is the question of how effectively the bureaucracy is functioning. Are they rendering impartial advice to political leaders in policymaking and are they delivering timely public services to the people at large? We need to focus attention on civil service reform as a whole, instead of just lateral entry.
While the country has undergone tremendous transformation politically, economically and socially, the pattern of the civil services examination has remained more or less the same.
Some questions arise: What exactly is the purpose of the civil service? If it is considered a generalist service as originally conceived and required to perform functions relating to maintaining law and order, district administration, local governance, collection of taxes, development and welfare, advising the political executive in policymaking and assisting in matters relating to parliamentary/state legislature functions, do we need professionals at the recruitment stage and should engineers and doctors be eligible to write the exam? The government invests a lot of money in engineering and medical education for the specific purpose of serving technical and health needs of the country. Secondly, if specialists are to be roped in at some stage, why recruit them along with those with those meant to be generalists?
Selection of candidates is now based on an examination that tests their competence in a subject of their choice and general knowledge, but does not test their aptitude. Today, the civil service is associated more with power, prestige and perks rather than being seen as an avenue to serve the people.
Take the case of Puja Khedkar, who managed to qualify for IAS having produced false certificates and demanding privileges even as a trainee. Hers is a glaring example of the expectations from what is considered an elitist service.
Hence, it is essential to conduct tests which would throw light on these expectations and the values the candidates cherish. More than technical excellence, what is required of a civil servant is a humane approach and an ability to deal with people.
Systems of recruitment
The systems prevalent in the UK and the US present interesting contrasts. The former has a permanent structure based on the principle of protecting the officers from political or personal influence, enabling the civil service to serve as an efficient instrument to give effect to the policies of the government of whatever political complexion.
On the contrary, in the US, which has a presidential form of government, the top-level officials come and go with the President. The Secretaries of various departments function more like ministers, and they have their own Deputy/Assistant Secretaries.
We have adopted the UK model, where officers enjoy protection under Articles 311 and 312 of the Constitution, ensuring security of tenure. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, India’s first Home Minister, argued for a non-partisan, non-political civil service, and said that “the service must be above party and we should ensure that political considerations, either in its recruitment or in its discipline or control, are reduced to the minimum, if not eliminated altogether.” While recruitment continues to be above party and political considerations, in matters of discipline and control, politics has made its way in.
While some have argued for adopting the American system to overcome conflicts or collusion between the politician and bureaucrat, it is a moot question if such a system would suit Indian conditions, where there is need to ensure stability and continuity in administration in view of coalition governments and the political instability we witness from time to time, particularly in states.
The civil service has played a key role in providing continuity and institutional memory. It is, however, important to review the security of tenure and introduce an exit system in case of non-performance.
Lateral entry is prevalent in developed countries like the UK, US, Belgium, Australia and New Zealand. They have flexible age limits, with different selection criteria, depending on the requirements of a particular post.
In an age where technology plays a significant role in human affairs, we do need specialists with technical skills, and lateral entry eminently serves the purpose. However, the approach has to be flexible, depending on the needs of the situation and need not be confined to the level of Joint Secretary.
Even in the present system, persons with technical qualifications serve as directors in central ministries. Specialists must serve a specific purpose and need not perform the functions of a Joint Secretary, the domain of generalists.
Civil service reform is the need of the hour and the time is opportune to throw open the subject for a public debate.
(A Ravindra is former Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka)