New Delhi: Amid pressure from the opposition and allies in the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), the Union government on Tuesday (August 20) asked the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) to withdraw an advertisement for lateral recruitment to 45 key posts that was issued on Saturday.
The advertisement issued on August 17 for 10 joint secretary and 35 director/deputy secretary-level posts through lateral entry was criticised not only by the opposition as a “well-planned conspiracy” to keep out reservations but was also publicly opposed by Union minister Chirag Paswan who said there can be “no ifs and buts” in reservations for government posts.
In a letter MoS Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions Jitendra Singh urged UPSC chairman Preeti Sudan to withdraw the advertisement for lateral recruitment, describing it as a step that would be a “significant advance in the pursuit of social justice and empowerment” and said that Prime Minister Narendra Modi is of the belief that the process of lateral entry must be aligned with the reservations.
“Further, the Hon’ble Prime Minister Narendra Modi is of the firm belief that the process of lateral entry must be aligned with the principles of equity and social justice enshrined in our Constitution, particularly concerning the provisions of reservations,” the letter stated.
“For the Hon’ble Prime Minister, reservation in employment is a cornerstone of our social justice framework, aimed at addressing historical injustices and promoting inclusivity.”
Just last month, Singh, in a written reply in the Lok Sabha, had stated that reservations are not applicable to lateral recruitments as they are appointments to “single post cadres”.
“Details relating to category of the selected candidates are not required to be maintained for making lateral recruitment, as reservation is not applicable for appointment to single post cadres,” he said in his response.
The rollback by the centre comes only a day after NDA ally and Union minister Chirag Paswan (Lok Janshakti Party-Ramvilas Paswan) criticised the move publicly.
“Reservation provisions must be there in any government appointment. There is no ifs and buts in this. No reservation exists in the private sector and if it is not implemented in government positions as well… The information came up before me on Sunday and it is a matter of concern for me,” Paswan said to Press Trust of India.
Hitting out at the recruitments announced by the UPSC on Saturday, the leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi accused the BJP of attempting to snatch reservations and called it an “attack on Dalits, OBCs and Adivasis.”
Opposing the move Samajwadi Party MP Akhilesh Yadav, whose party is the second largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha after the Congress, had called for a nationwide agitation against the government’s lateral recruitment.
In the face of criticism, the BJP had doubled down with Union ministers defending lateral recruitments and citing previous government appointments, including under the UPA.
Union minister Ashwini Vaishnaw on Sunday called out the Congress’ “hypocrisy” and said that it was the UPA that brought lateral entry through the Second Administrative Reforms Committee under Veerappa Moiley in 2005.
On Monday, Union minister Arjun Ram Meghwal also said that it was the Congress that had started the process of lateral entry and pointed to former prime minister Manmohan Singh being made finance secretary in 1976 through lateral entry, and Planning Commission deputy chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia.
“Persons of SC, ST and OBC categories also apply. IAS vacancies are different. They claim we are ending reservations. What were you doing when you were recruiting? Suddenly their love for OBCs has come out,” he said in a video statement.
Similar statements also find place in Singh’s letter to the UPSC chairman on Tuesday, where he states that lateral recruitment was also conducted under previous governments. As instances of prior recruitments through lateral entry, Singh said that under earlier governments, “posts as important as that of Secretary in various ministries, leadership of UIDAI, etc have been given to lateral entrants without following any process of reservations.”
“Further it is stated that the members of the infamous National Advisory Council used to run a super-bureaucracy that controlled the Prime Minister’s Office.”
Singh in his letter stated that while major lateral entrants before 2014 were “made in an ad-hoc manner including cases of alleged favouritism” the Modi government made efforts to make the system institutionally drive, transparent and open.
Following the rollback, Union ministers including Vaishnaw who defended lateral entry said that the move to align such recruitments with reservations shows Modi’s “commitment to social justice.”
Meghwal too in a statement said that while the move was started under the Congress, the rollback shows Modi’s commitment to social justice.
“This shows that the prime minister is committed to social justice. Although it is true that lateral entry started from the Congress era and was running in an ad-hoc manner. There are many examples like Manmohan Singh. This was systemised in 2017. On the point of reservation, the prime minister is always seen standing with the poor with the SC, ST and OBSs,” he said.
The rollback comes as the BJP, which was cut down to size in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, to 240 seats from 303 in 2019; as the opposition INDIA alliance centred its campaign around “saving the Constitution” and social justice including a caste census, particularly in Uttar Pradesh, which handed the saffron party its largest defeat in a decade.
Following the announcement of the rollback of the advertisement, opposition parties claimed victory in their fight for social justice.
“The Congress Party’s fight for social justice for our Dalits, tribals, backward and weaker sections has foiled the BJP’s plans to snatch away reservation,” wrote Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge on X.
RJD MP Manoj Jha said that the rollback is not “an ordinary achievement.”
“All those who could see a design against constitutional principles of ‘social justice’ and expressed their anguish need to realise that only ‘they have made it possible’,” he said.
