IANS Exclusive: Former Union Minister Veerappa Moily speaks on Lateral Entry, Karnataka MUDA Scam
Former Union Law Minister M Veerappa Moily on Tuesday acknowledged that the second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC), chaired by him in 2005 did recommend lateral entry into government services, however, claimed that the present NDA dispensation isn’t following the guidelines in letter and spirit. In an exclusive interaction with IANS, senior Congress leader Veerappa Moily said that the purpose was to lay down a proper framework for non-partisan and unbiased recruitment of ‘people of expertise’ into top government positions.
#Veerappamoily #lateralentry #congress #ndagovernment #administrativereformscommission #mudascam #Karnataka #bjp
#Veerappamoily #lateralentry #congress #ndagovernment #administrativereformscommission #mudascam #Karnataka #bjp
Transcript
00:00ERC has given 15 reports. Out of this, the lateral entry matter comes in the report number
00:1410. This report is called refurbishing of personal administration. This is the subject.
00:25There is an entry here in the page 208 and 209. We said how lateral entry can be done.
00:35It's not a new subject. Earlier, the persons like Dr. Manmohan Singh, Alu Alia, so many
00:45people have been taken at a lateral entry. There are more successful stories also. Even
00:53though there was no systemic approach, it was done on merit. Absolutely, they performed
01:02very well. Inspired by that, we thought that that issue will have to be studied and ultimately
01:12the process and system should be evolved. That is how our report at page 208, lateral
01:19entry and 09.5.3 paragraph, we said that this is a matter which is of a great consequence.
01:32The commission is of the opinion that as far as lateral entrants are concerned, such integration
01:39should be carried out at the present level of additional secretary bar HAG which is a
01:46leadership position from which one can aspire to reach the rank of secretary to government.
01:51This is the objective. These posts involve leadership rather than purely operational
01:59roles and issues as such as requirement of greater functional technical knowledge of
02:06operational levels and the difficulties of managing large scale recruitment at lower
02:15levels can be avoided by following this procedure. This is the approach which we suggested after
02:20a thorough examination of the system prevailing in India, system prevailing in Britain, system
02:26prevailing in US, system prevailing in Australia. We have taken all these models before coming to
02:35a conclusion. In fact, what we said, it cannot be done ad hoc. You cannot just pick and choose
02:45men like this. We suggested that creation of central civil services authority to be
02:53created under the proposed new civil services law. This authority has to be created and the
03:00authority should be empowered to conduct interview or recruit people or whatever it is.
03:05So, this system we have done it. According to my knowledge, till today the present government
03:12has not constituted any central civil services authority and that is a basic thing. Central
03:21civil services authority to be entrusted with the task of identifying the posts
03:27at the higher management level and above where induction of outside talent should be,
03:36could be desirable. First, it has to be examined objectively where it is to be placed,
03:41where the placement should take place. Identify the post first. Such post could
03:47then be opened for recruitment by tapping talent both from within and outside the government.
03:54These talents should be not only from outside, but also within many officers who are eligible
04:04to become additional secretaries. They should be also be given an opportunity, not one way traffic.
04:10To be recruited by tapping talent both from within the services and outside the government,
04:19a transference process to be implemented by the authority. It should be transference
04:24procedure not very subjective assessment of things. This should be similar to the
04:29existing process of direct level appointments in the central public service undertakings.
04:34On completion of the selection process, the authority's recommendation in this regard
04:40would be sent to the government for approval. Government comes into play only after the
04:47selection process is over. While submitting the annual report to the parliament, annual
04:52report or administrative report of the respective department which is concerned
04:56with the personal recruitment, the authority should specifically draw the attention of
05:01the legislature that is the parliament. The cases in which his recommendation has
05:06not been accepted by the government, they should give the reason. If the number of applicants or
05:14aspirants are arrayed, they will select few, reject a few. Why you have rejected,
05:20this explanation will have to be appended to the report submitted along with their department to
05:28the parliament. And if it is to be done by the state government, then it has to be presented
05:34before the state assembly. These are the recruitments and the process of the ad hoc
05:42appointment of a lateral entry will lead to a partition method of recruitment.
05:47So, if you do not adopt any of one of this process, then it will amount to partition
05:55appointment. This is what we are concerned because the present government has not taken
06:04any of this. They simply say UPI itself considered this lateral entry. UPI did not
06:10consider this in this way. We have suggested the methodology, we have suggested the process,
06:15how objective it should be, it should be transparent and also matter to be placed
06:20before the parliament. These are all the requirements which this government has
06:26only taken the skeleton, but the flesh and blood is taken away. That cannot be done.
06:35This is the question is that I have suggested lateral entry,
06:41because it cannot be indiscriminate. It should not be biased, it should not be subjective.
06:46Men in power cannot think that their men could be taken and the men with the same
06:53political or other ideology could be taken. That is how this guidance will have to be
06:59strictly followed. Then only non-partisan, objective, transparent view could be taken
07:07and decision will be correct. I was chairing it and it is not suggested by Dr. Manmohan Singh or
07:19anyone in the government, but we thought in a system when we give a report for the administrative
07:26reforms, we said the lateral entry should take place so that new blood will come to the highest
07:31level and the proper, talented people will be considered for that, not only from outside,
07:40from the market, but also from within the cadre who are already serving in the similar category.
07:47If they adopt all these formulas which we have adopted and recommended in the administrative,
07:57we have no objection, which they are shortcutting the old method by saying they are thinking of
08:06getting the least from the UPSC. No, no, this UPSC is different. This is a talent searching
08:13organization. That talent will have to be searched, not that people will file application
08:19and UPSC cannot do this kind of a job. They are not meant for that. This lateral entry
08:30will have to be done strictly according to the parameters laid down in our recommendation. No,
08:36no, basic, not basic, absolute difference. While they are doing it, they want to pick
08:40and choose people from the market, whichever suits their ideology and it is bound to fail and
08:47it is bound to create the demoralization among the cadre, people who are already serving. If
08:54the talented will come, why not? There were some people like Krishnamoorthy who headed many PSUs
09:01and all. There are all the people, Manmohan Singh for example, Alu Alia. I am telling you,
09:05these are all the people who have taken. And even then, Nehru's time, it was done very
09:11objectively. Now we say that sometimes we will be carried away with our own political ideology,
09:17people in governments. So, they choose anybody they like. Systematically, they are bringing
09:23people with wrong qualification and they will not be befitted to it. They will destroy the system.
09:30What is the wrong done by Siddharma here? He has not allotted. His period,
09:41the land was not taken by the Mudda and he has not given 14 sites. You know,
09:48what is the culpable offence committed by Siddharma here as an administrator?
09:53How the office, whether the office has been abused or is he misused or any ungainful,
10:03he intended to do it for, you know, in fact, for the gain of his spouse or himself. Absolutely
10:13nothing. You attribute something which has not happened. He has no hand in it. It has not
10:21happened when he was Chief Minister. It has not happened when he was in power. Then in that case,
10:27you know, without applying the mind on this aspect, whether there is a part, whether there
10:34is any part played by Siddharma here in this particular episode, whether he has granted,
10:40whether he has acquired land and then granted, where is the illegality? When basic things are
10:47not, basic criteria is not fulfilled, where is wrong? I think it's a misplaced judgment by the
10:53Governor. He should not have done it. Why he has not applied his mind, I don't know. Only when the
10:59corruption matter comes, when you abuse the office, you abuse the office, then grant some favour.
11:06There is no favour granted by him and if at all it is done, who are granted those sites at that
11:14time or acquired that land, I think these prosecutions should be filed against them,
11:20not against Siddharamaya. And after all, if it is illegal, it is illegal, that is why if it is
11:27illegal, matter may be examined by a Judicial Commission, that he has done. Siddharamaya has
11:33done, he has travelled extra mile by ordering a Judicial Inquiry. That will bring out the truth.
11:39But as the evidence before the Governor is not just available for the partisan attitude or any
11:50criminal intention or motive. He has acted according to the advice given by the advocate,
12:00on that I have no comment at all. Matter is before this High Court.
12:09No, no, impossible. It will not happen. It is a, after all, this is our India, you know,
12:15has the longest history of successful democracy, well tested. Number of elections have been held.
12:22We have already passed more than 75 years. I think democracy, as democratic fabric is concerned,
12:29we are stable, very firm. Fundamentals are very strong. I don't think a situation of that kind
12:36can happen here.
12:39No, no, the scrapping of the Article 370 has not helped. It was a well thought out decision for a
12:51proper integration of that territory to us because at that time it was a disputed territory. You know,
12:57settle that territory is part and parcel of India. In that case, you know, whenever you want to
13:03change certain article, you should think 100 times before changing it. Even if you want to
13:09change it, how, what mechanism should put in to fulfil the aspiration of the people, I think the
13:16present government has not thought of it. It is responsibly acted. No, that is another matter. But
13:21I think you should understand what, by what I said. When you are going to remove certain article,
13:27you should pros and cons will have to be properly scrutinized, examined and, you know,
13:32think up to it because it has not succeeded, that is definite. If it has not succeeded,
13:37I think an objective view of this aspect will have to be taken.