Union Minister Chirag Paswan has publicly voiced his concerns over the Centre’s recent push for lateral entry into top government positions, stating that the move is “completely wrong.” Paswan, who represents the Lok Janshakti Party (LJP), has expressed his party’s firm opposition to this policy. “Speaking on behalf of my party, we are absolutely not in favor of this. This is completely wrong, and I will raise this matter before the government,” Paswan declared, signaling the potential for intra-coalition disagreements over the issue.
Paswan’s criticism comes in the wake of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s sharp attack on Prime Minister Narendra Modi, accusing the government of undermining constitutional institutions through its lateral entry policy. Gandhi has alleged that the Modi government is using this mechanism to favor individuals with affiliations to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), thereby compromising the impartiality and integrity of the administrative system.
Opposition’s stance: A threat to reservation and constitutional rights
The move has not only drawn ire from Congress but also from other opposition leaders who view it as a direct threat to the reservation policy and the constitutional rights of marginalized communities. Samajwadi Party (SP) chief Akhilesh Yadav has been particularly vocal, describing the lateral entry initiative as a “big conspiracy” against the country. Yadav claims that the policy is designed to deprive the Pichhde (backward classes), Dalit, and Alpsankhyak (minorities) communities of their rightful opportunities within the government.
Yadav’s concerns resonate with a broader narrative among opposition leaders who argue that lateral entry undermines the established quota system that ensures representation of Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in government jobs. The recent UPSC notification for recruiting joint secretaries, directors, and deputy secretaries through lateral entry has intensified these fears, with critics arguing that it could erode the gains made by these communities over decades.
Government’s defense: A legacy of the UPA, now transparent and merit-based
In response to these criticisms, Union Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw has defended the policy, arguing that the opposition’s objections are rooted in hypocrisy. Vaishnaw pointed out that the concept of lateral entry was originally developed during the UPA government’s tenure, a fact often overlooked by its current detractors. “INC hypocrisy is evident on the lateral entry matter. It was the UPA government which developed the concept of lateral entry,” Vaishnaw stated, emphasizing that the policy was not a novel invention of the Modi administration but rather a continuation of an earlier reform initiative.
More Read
Vaishnaw further elaborated that the Second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC), established during the UPA period, had recommended the recruitment of experts from outside the traditional civil services to fill roles requiring specialized knowledge. The ARC’s recommendations, Vaishnaw asserted, were aimed at addressing gaps in expertise within the government and enhancing the effectiveness of governance.
The minister also highlighted the NDA government’s efforts to create a transparent and merit-based selection process for lateral entry. According to Vaishnaw, this approach ensures that the best-qualified candidates, regardless of their background, are brought into the administrative system to tackle complex governance challenges. “The reform measure implemented by the NDA government will improve governance,” Vaishnaw stated, dismissing the opposition’s claims as unfounded and politically motivated.
A contentious policy with far-reaching implications
The ongoing debate over lateral entry into government positions highlights the deep political and ideological divides in India’s approach to governance and administration. While the government argues that lateral entry is necessary to bring in domain experts and improve the efficiency of the civil services, the opposition views it as a potential threat to the hard-won rights of marginalized communities.
As the controversy continues to unfold, it is clear that the policy will remain a flashpoint in Indian politics, with significant implications for the future of the country’s administrative framework. Union Minister Chirag Paswan’s strong stance against the policy suggests that the debate is far from settled, and that it could lead to further tensions within the ruling coalition as well as between the government and the opposition.
