A series of motivated and spurious arguments have been advanced in various forums alleging that the Modi government in 2018 aimed to institutionalise lateral entries to undermine reservations in appointments. These assertions misrepresent the true intent of lateral entry and conveniently ignore the ad-hoc appointments made during the Congress regime, as well as how the institutionalisation of lateral appointments was a crucial step in addressing historical discrimination.
Continuing its disruptive agenda, the Congress party has now launched another campaign against lateral entries, rife with misinformation and falsified rhetoric. With many of its leaders claiming that a Bangladesh-like situation could arise in India against the Prime Minister, the Congress’s intent is highly questionable.
The Modi government institutionalised the process of lateral entries in 2018. The PM cited the intricacies of an evolving economy and the requirement of specialists from industry in the bureaucracy. In principle, the government has not gone back on its promise of allowing lateral entrants into the executive. However, it wants to ensure that the principles of social justice are adhered to and historical wrongs are corrected. It is in this context that one must analyse the directive from the PM to the Department of Personnel and Training. Interpreting the directive on social principles as a reversal on lateral entries is not only incorrect but also overlooks the problematic arrangements that have persisted since independence, beginning with an ambassador who was also the sister of India’s first Prime Minister.
In reality, the Congress campaign against lateral entries is a shallow attempt to cover up its faults from the past, where lateral entries had more to do with the whims of the party or a family, and not the needs of the government or bureaucracy. Interestingly, India’s former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh started out as a lateral entrant, the Chief Economic Advisor in 1972. He then moved on to the position of Secretary in the Finance Ministry in 1976, and 14 years later, was at the helm during the Balance of Payment crisis. Montek Singh Ahluwalia, a key figure during the UPA government, started out as special secretary to the Prime Minister in 1988, moving on to the position of Commerce Secretary in 1990. Other names include Vijay L Kelkar, who joined as a Secretary in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas in 1994; Bimal Jalan who joined as the Chief Economic Advisor in 1981, Prakash Tandon, who was the Head of State Trading Corporation, KPP Nambiar, Secretary in the Department of Electronics, Suman Dubey, Press advisor in the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.
Dr. Shankar Acharya, the Chief Economic Advisor appointed in 1993, was a lateral entry too. Kaushik Basu, an economist, was another lateral entrant during the UPA era. Raghuram Rajan, before he became the Governor of the Reserve Bank of India, joined the Ministry of Finance as the Chief Economic Advisor.
In 2009, the Congress shut down the Multipurpose National Identity Card (MNIC) programme, which had failed to make an impact. This led to the birth of UIDAI (Unique Identification Authority of India), which started the Aadhaar programme. Nandan Nilekani, heading UIDAI, was a lateral entrant to the system in 2009. Even after his appointment, the Aadhaar programme was mired in bureaucratic hurdles until 2014.
People close to the first family of the Congress were also awarded lateral entry positions. Sam Pitroda was the Chairman of the Telecom Commission in 1989 and again appointed as the advisor to the Prime Minister in 2009. Less than three years later, he was infamously moved out of the commission.
This ad-hoc generosity was also visible in the appointments to the National Advisory Council during the UPA. All appointments to the NAC, which actively interfered with the business of the legislature, were done on an ad-hoc basis and without consistency with the principles of social justice.
Congress’s history of discrimination against the SCs, STs, and OBCs is not restricted to lateral entry alone. The letter from Nehru to his Chief Ministers, stating his views on reservation, is well known. Terming the inclusion of the backward castes as encouraging the second-rate, Nehru stood firmly against the principles of social justice in the 1950s.
The Congress continued its discriminatory policies against the SCs, STs, and OBCs by designating many government-aided institutions, like the Jamia Millia Islamia and the Aligarh Muslim University, as minority institutions. By giving minority status to Jamia Millia Islamia in 2011, under UPA rule, the Congress deprived thousands of deserving backward students of their constitutional rights. Yet, the same Congress had no qualms about pursuing religion-based reservations in the final years of the UPA.
In Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, Congress has pursued religion-based reservations by diluting the rights and stakes of OBCs. The entire opposition alliance, led by the Congress, practices prejudice against the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Quick to hand over the rights of the marginalized groups to other religious communities, the alliance has staked the interests of the backward groups at the altar of appeasement politics. The affidavit submitted by the West Bengal government, currently facing criticism for the reported arbitrary inclusion of 77 castes, 75 of which are Muslim, in the OBC list, has also raised eyebrows.
Rahul Gandhi, in his capacity as the Leader of the Opposition, was corrected by the Defence Minister in the Lok Sabha after his incorrect statements on Agniveers. Regarding NEET, the Supreme Court has clearly directed against re-examination, much to the dismay of the Congress.
Dubious activists and short-seller misadventures have found no takers in the Indian markets, thus leaving many wondering if the subject of lateral entries is the new hope for the grand old party to latch on to. This is certainly not the first time that this has happened, and it won’t be the last either, where Rahul Gandhi and his party have never been able to walk the talk. This is where the approach of the Modi government significantly differs from the Congress-led UPA.
Today, when the institutionalisation of lateral entry is imminent, a historical wrong is being reversed for good. While adhering to the cause of social justice, the government is ensuring people with the right expertise and experience contribute to the cause of nation-building.
As they did on several other issues in the past, the Congress wants to use lateral entries as a political tool to generate political momentum ahead of the upcoming elections, following their third consecutive defeat in the Lok Sabha. Therefore, Rahul Gandhi, who advocated the idea of lateral entries in 2019, is now using the subject as another launchpad for his divisive pitch. However, today’s theatrics do not erase the mistakes of the past.
