The lateral entry saga, back from the UPA days

The United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government disregarded the recommendation of the Second Administrative Reforms Committee (ARC) chaired by M Veerappa Moily on formalising the process of lateral entry of government officers, went ahead with an alternative plan to do so, but abandoned it later after opposition from ministries, according to documents reviewed by HT and senior officials then in government.“Interestingly, the idea was discussed even as the government deferred a similar proposal of the Second ARC, which was chaired by Veerappa Moily. The Moily Committee had suggested a transparent institutional mechanism for lateral entries at the higher level of administration,” a person who was in the government at the time said on condition of anonymity.The issue of lateral entry was back in the spotlight this month when the Narendra Modi government put out an advertisement for 45 posts in various departments. The move was criticised by the Congress on the grounds that it subverted reservations, and there were voices raised against it by allies such as Union minister Chirag Paswan. The ad was then withdrawn, with the government saying it was committed to affirmative action and would revisit lateral entries by factoring in the reservation policy.During the UPA regime, according to records reviewed by HT, the Second ARC submitted 15 reports between 2005 and 2009 with 1,514 recommendations. Of these, the government accepted 1,183 for implementation , including 98 from the controversial 10th Report – “Refurbishing of Personnel Administration: Scaling New Heights”.Out of the 98 recommendations in the 10th report on November 2008– this was also the report with a specific recommendation on lateral entry -- 51 were accepted, 17 not accepted, and 30 were deferred. The recommendation on lateral entry was one of the 30. To be sure, the concept of lateral entry was previously suggested by the Sixth Pay Commission in 2008.The summary of the 59th recommendation said: “The Central Civil Services Authority (CCSA) should deal with matters of assignment of domains to officers, preparing panels for posting of officers at the level of joint secretary and above, fixing tenures for senior posts, deciding on posts which could be advertised for lateral entry and such other matters that may be referred to it by the government.”CCSA was the institutional mechanism recommended by the committee for the same. “The commission feels 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 institutionalise the process of induction of outside talent into the government,” the panel said in its summary.“Lateral entries should be done at the present level of additional secretary / HAG [higher administrative grade] which is a leadership position from which one can aspire to reach the rank of secretary to government. The Central Civil Services Authority (to be created under the proposed civil services law) should be entrusted with the task of identifying the posts at the higher management level, HAG and above, where induction of outside talent would be desirable. Such posts could then be opened for recruitment by tapping talent both from within and outside the government through a transparent process to be implemented by the authority,” it added.But the UPA government decided not to accept the recommendation.Instead, about 24 months later, it adopted an alternative route.This plan was steered by the Prime Minister’s Office, which, according to a background note for a May 12, 2011 meeting that was circulated the previous day, listed “lateral induction” as one of the solutions to “mismanagement of human resources” and proposed that 10% of posts at the joint secretary (JS) level be “open to lateral entry” from people in government service, private sector, and academia. The meeting was chaired by the then principal secretary to the PM and it was held in the context of an instruction from then prime minister Manmohan Singh to introduce administrative reforms. According to the background note, Singh, on January 21, 2011 directed the PMO to work out a far-reaching agenda of administrative reforms that could be brought to the Cabinet in three-four months. The note went on to add that the prime minister underscored the areas such as measures to improve governance, giving “greater emphasis” to merit, developing “a more effective and robust system” to deal with cases of corruption and poor performance, and giving greater flexibility in service rules. “Principal Secretary may supervise the process and arrange a briefing for me after some preliminary work has been done,” the note cited the PM as instructing.Mentioning that 10% of JS-level posts would be open to lateral entry, the note said, “The cabinet secretary will identify the posts, in consultation with the ministries” and “the lateral entrants will be selected by UPSC based on their CVs and an interview/limited competitive test, which would test the domain knowledge of the officer.”“The appointment of the lateral entrants will be on a five-year contract basis. The lateral entrant will also have the flexibility to leave the job, if he so desires,” it said. “The age limit and other details will be worked out by the DOPT, in consultation with the UPSC and the ministries concerned,” it added. Once selected, the officers would undergo a training, the details of which could be worked out by the DoPT, it said.But the plan remained a non-starter.One reason was a lack of enthusiasm among ministries and line departments, it appears from records at the time.Two years later, the UPA government circulated a Cabinet note (it circulated another one in 2014) on lateral entry.The similar Cabinet notes talked about the need to fill “higher administrative grade (HAG) posts requiring specialised or technical knowledge by suitable officers, which are not encadred, from within the government or outside”, a retired bureaucrat with knowledge of the matter said.Following the 2013 Cabinet note, DoPT circulated a note, known as office memorandum, on June 17, 2013, among various ministries and line departments, seeking their inputs on identification of such “posts requiring technical/specialised knowledge” as well as “examining the need for such contract appointments”. The circular was issued by then director, DoPT, Mukta Goel, documents reviewed by HT show.“The underlying principle was that the first preference should be serving government officials who fulfill the criteria and in case such expertise is not available, then to hire from outside. So serving officers were encouraged to apply,” the former official said. The DoPT’s note of June 17 2013 to ministries stated: “The objective is to ensure availability of the best talent for these higher level posts in government.”“The UPA did not want to take lateral entries for lower-ranking posts below the level of HAG although the Sixth Pay Commission also recommended lateral entries for SAG (senior administrative grade) posts,” a former official who retired as Union secretary and took part in the deliberations said. DoPT was the nodal department to institutionalise the process of lateral entries in the civil services. Its circular included a concept note, a model contract form and pay grades, arrived at after consultations with UPSC and the expenditure department. Serving officers were to be given the option of continuing with their current pay grade or opt for market-driven wages. Salaries of outsiders were to be capped at ₹2,00,000 a month, without inflation indexation. And ministries were to determine the need for specialised personnel.That proved to be the undoing of the plan. No ministry or departments conducted any exercise to determine any need for specialised personnel. Neither did any of them get back to DoPT, the retired bureaucrat said. In fact, a year later, on June 16 2014, DoPT sent out a second circular to ministries and line departments, telling them that “this department (DoPT) has not received any comments”.It was unclear if UPA had a change of heart over the issue or if it was just bureaucratic reluctance. But, by then, the UPA regime was on its way out anyway.(with inputs from Sanjeev Jha)

Sign in

Cricket

World News

Cities

HT Business

Lifestyle

Entertainment

Education News

Astrology

HT Premium

Assembly Elections: Latest News

Videos

Photos

Sports

HT Insight

HT INITIATIVES

Real Estate

More from HT

The lateral entry saga, back from the UPA days

The issue of lateral entry was back in the spotlight this month when the Narendra Modi government put out an advertisement for 45 posts in various departments

Hi, {{name}}

More from HT

The lateral entry saga, back from the UPA days

The issue of lateral entry was back in the spotlight this month when the Narendra Modi government put out an advertisement for 45 posts in various departments