Opposition Parties Criticize Government’s Lateral Entry Policy, Warn of Agitation

The government’s recent decision to introduce 45 new positions in central ministries through
lateral entry has sparked significant backlash from opposition parties, who argue that this
move undermines the traditional recruitment process and threatens the representation of
marginalized communities in government roles. The positions, including 10 joint secretaries
and 35 directors or deputy secretaries, are to be filled through a process that some see as a
means to bring in external expertise, while others view it as a politically motivated maneuver.

Rahul Gandhi, Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, has been particularly vocal in his
criticism of the lateral entry initiative. He argues that the policy is a direct threat to the
fairness and inclusivity of the government’s recruitment process, particularly the system of
reservations for Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward
Classes (OBC). According to Gandhi, the government’s decision to bypass the Union Public
Service Commission (UPSC) for these appointments not only undermines the Constitution
but also threatens to exclude the underprivileged from critical roles in governance.
Gandhi’s concerns are rooted in the belief that the lateral entry system could
disproportionately benefit those with affiliations to the ruling party and its ideological base.
He has raised alarms that this method of recruitment may be used to appoint individuals who
align with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), thereby politicizing what should be an
impartial and merit-based civil service. Gandhi argues that such appointments would serve
to entrench the influence of the BJP and its allies within the government, further
marginalizing those who rely on the traditional UPSC route to secure these positions.
The Congress leader has also linked this policy to broader issues of social justice and equity.
He has expressed deep concern that lateral entry will exacerbate the existing
underrepresentation of SC, ST, and OBC individuals in high-ranking bureaucratic positions.
Gandhi sees this as a deliberate effort to weaken the reservation system, depriving talented
youth from marginalized communities of the opportunities they have worked hard to attain
through civil service examinations. For Gandhi, this move represents not just a policy
change, but a significant rollback of the social justice gains that have been made over the
years.
Mallikarjun Kharge, president of the Congress party, has echoed Gandhi’s concerns, framing
the lateral entry policy as a “deliberate attempt” to exclude SC, ST, and OBC communities
from important government roles. Kharge has accused the BJP of launching a “double attackon reservation,” suggesting that the lateral entry system is designed to ensure that these
marginalized communities are systematically sidelined from positions of power. This, he
argues, is part of a broader strategy by the BJP to erode the mechanisms of social justice
that have been put in place to ensure fair representation within the bureaucracy.
The controversy surrounding lateral entry has also drawn sharp criticism from other political
parties. The Samajwadi Party (SP) and Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) have both condemned
the government’s actions, framing them as a “conspiracy” by the BJP to fill high-level
government posts with individuals who share the party’s ideological views. Both parties see
this as a move to bypass the traditional, transparent recruitment processes, allowing the BJP
to appoint its ideological allies to key positions through non-transparent means.
SP chief Akhilesh Yadav has been particularly outspoken, warning of an impending agitation
against the lateral entry policy. Yadav has announced that the SP will launch a protest
campaign on October 2, signaling the possibility of widespread political unrest over the
issue. This move by the SP suggests that opposition to the lateral entry policy could become
a rallying point for broader discontent with the BJP government, particularly among those
who feel that the policy threatens to undermine the inclusivity and fairness of the Indian
bureaucracy.
The opposition’s critique of the lateral entry policy is not limited to concerns about
representation and social justice. Rahul Gandhi has also linked the policy to ongoing
concerns about transparency and accountability within the government. He has pointed to
the recent controversy surrounding the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) as a
case in point. Gandhi referenced the appointment of Madhabi Puri Buch, the first person
from the private sector to chair SEBI, who has faced allegations of conflicts of interest
following a report by Hindenburg Research. For Gandhi, this example illustrates the potential
dangers of allowing individuals from the private sector to occupy key government positions,
where their actions may be influenced by corporate interests rather than the public good.
As the debate over lateral entry continues, it is clear that the policy has touched a nerve
within the Indian political landscape. For the opposition, the government’s decision
represents a significant threat to the principles of social justice, fairness, and transparency
that are meant to underpin the civil service. With the SP and other parties gearing up for
protests, the controversy over lateral entry is likely to intensify in the coming months,
potentially leading to significant political repercussions for the BJP government.