overview of caste and reservation

The whole point of reservations is to promote backward groups. so the topic starts from there where these backward groups arise. We say that ‘all men are born equal’. This is not actually true. People come from different economic backgrounds, different castes. In reality, the rich class has easy access to good education while the others do not. And that is where the caste reservation comes in. who would not want to be superior? this hunger for power gave rise to upper and lower classes in the society. in the early times the society was divided into various castes depending on the type of jobs people did and rarely on the god they worshipped. higher income jobs and jobs related to god reserved higher positions and the rest became the more-humilliated, avoided and under-priviliged classes. the so called superior classes suppressed the growth of the lower classes which made them backward. And the sad part is that a person’s caste is decided by birth. similar was the case of women becoming backward. they were not allowed to do several things of which education and working outside home were the worst things which made them backward. so reservations were introduced with a good intension to boast their development. so that they're not left behind in development due to these biased divisions. But Caste Reservation is just one way to gain equality. To gain proper equality more, better reforms have to be made.

Reservations are meant to promote their growth. Reservation in education is meant to avoid caste based discrimination of students in educational institutes, same’s the case with politics. but what happens some times is worthy people loose deserving positions because of them being already reserved. now this becomes an endless argument. it brings us to the point if reservations should be continued or not.

on 1 hand reservations promote backward classes which is necessary, on the other some really deserving people are deprived of their right!

In its own stead, nothing is bad or good. It is the way it is used, implemented and taken up that makes it bad or good. In India reservation was and is used to please some people and get quick votes, be it SC&ST provisions in constitution which was originally meant for 15 years or implementation of Mandal commission after its lying in cold storage for years. There are many aspects of reservation. It is fact there are some strata of society who need support to rise from their current status of poverty or backwardness. Not all of us who have not seen deprived life know they really know what a backward person faces in her/his life.
However there is opposition for reservation because the benefit of it is are not going to actual people rather they are taken up by some people of these society who are already in upper class whereas actual needy people are still at the same place. No one will object if a really needy get the benefit, Most of people are furious since it is someone who is not needy who is reaping benefit. There are many arguments in this reservation issue:

1. Instead of caste basis, give it on economic basis: As far as making economic condition as criteria is concerned, there is always good and bad of all thoughts. Good about this will be that this should be the correct way to decide for giving help however there are too many lacunas in this as getting certificate for economic background is very easy to get since no one file income tax return and there is no proof of incomes for people other than salaried people so what will happen ultimately is again people who do not deserve the benefit will get it and needy will remain eluded with this.

2. Incompetent people in jobs: I agree that when it comes to job then what we need are competent people in jobs to provide proper service and let our country grow. It is wrong to say the people who need help to rise first time are not competent but what is required is that we bring them up and educate and train them so that they are competent enough to take up the challenges.

3. Would you like a doctor coming through quota to operate on you who does not how to use scalpel: Now if we talk about getting a doctor without enough skills. This is often repeated example but what we fail to understand that a person cannot be a doctor just by getting admission in medical college. S/he became doctor after passing out from the college. If we say that college examination system is such that they will pass person without knowledge then problem does not lie in reservation in admission but in examination system which required to be looked into. Having said that if education system is not good and it will allow person without skill to get the degree then what is guarantee that a person who has come by other route let us by paying higher fees or something and for that matter what is guarantee that a person who have scored 90+ marks is good in medical study. So then we are running risk of many doctors without skills operating on us. So this argument that if the person has come with reservation will be not competent doctor is not correct. If a person has passed MBBS (s/he can be anyone reserve one or other) and do not know how to use scalpel and then we should hung all the teachers who have taught them, people who have set the papers and all the examiners who has taken their practical exams and checker who checked their examination papers.

4. What about other type of reservations: why there so much hue and cry about backward class reservations, do everyone really want selection of students on merit basis? if yes, then why there is not no one appear to oppose the other kind of quota called as management quota or nri quota. if all the protest is based on the concept of merit, will the protestant also oppose the private medical and engineering college; giving birth to so called meritorious students by engulfing a big price?

5. Reservation will take country backward: If that is true then why & how the south Indian states likes Tamilnadu, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh & Karnataka are more developed than the states of north India? Though there is average 60% reservation is present in both government & private sector.
We have to swallow bitter pill that India is still not free from Caste, gender and religion bias. To remove it we need everyone at equal social status. We need healthy education that can clean our prejudices. We need reservation for those who really need that and we need a surname free India so that Eklavya & Arjuna both can serve the nation equally without any bias.
So mantra for anything to be good and successful is honest implementation of the same.

The fact is that 59 years of freedom has still not evened out the playing field for the country.
The concept of reservation brings forth one important aspect - Accountability. The necessity of furnishing the proof that the percentages of reservation are adhered to, coupled with the business logic of loss, when faced with empty seats, ensure that effort is taken to bring education to ppl.
There are enough colleges to cater to student strength.
The basic problem is the iconoclastic mentality of the society. We give an icon status to an IIT/IIM educated, never evaluating the individual competence of a student. A good student is good, whichever the institution he has come from.

THE WAVE of rioting at the time of the Mandal Commission showed that the goal of reservation had not simply been unfulfilled, but totally distorted. It revealed, among other things, the degree to which educated upper caste youth had gotten into the habit of considering the Government administration not as ``public service'' but as a source of employment - with lucrative salaries and pensions, not to mention ample scope for bribe-taking.

Bribery - a major theme of Phule's polemical 19th century writings - has not apparently changed very much. There are undoubtedly many honest officials, but they are fighting a system that gives them very little scope, one which binds together politicians and bureaucrats in a nexus of corruption. International surveys of corruption in Government show India at the bottom of the list; losses in ``transmission and distribution'' of the State electricity boards; the necessity of giving ``weight'' in order to get projects approved or papers moved through desks in administrative offices, all remain flagrant. In this context, the idea that reservation somehow has an adverse effect on ``merit'' and ``efficiency'' looks somewhat laughable. Since the mass education which all the anti-caste radicals so fervently sought has also remained a distant dream, this has rendered the masses of toiling people more dependent on the literate officials and activists.

How much do the upper castes dominate in Government service? The Mandal Commission report itself made interesting revelations. According to its statistics, the ``forward castes'' estimated at 25.5 per cent of the population made up 78.34 per cent of employees of Central Ministries and Departments; the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes together were 16.83 per cent and the Backward Castes were 4.83 per cent. In Class I, these figures were 90.23 per cent for the ``forward castes,'' 7.18 per cent for the ``Scheduled'' communities and 2.59 per cent for ``other backwards''. Clearly, reservation had provided some scope for Dalits and Adivasis, but the ``other backward'' communities, 52 per cent of the total Indian population, were hopelessly behind.

Of course, this was twenty years ago. Has the situation changed? There is almost no way of knowing. In contrast to advanced countries, where disciplines such as sociology focus on issues of ethnicity and class, or the degree of inter-marriage among various social groups, there have been no surveys of Government employment, no effort to link caste and economic status at the top levels of the social order. American sociologists such as C. Wright Mills and William Domhoff devoted efforts to study the ``power elite'' and the ``ruling class'', in contrast, this has been a subject about which Indian sociology has kept an embarrassed silence. With continued resistance to taking up the issues of caste in the census operations, there is simply no information available. Thus all the debates today about whether caste remains an important category of behaviour are taking place in an informational vacuum. It would perhaps not be so fantastic, then, to assume that the situation revealed by the Mandal Commission continues. The lack of information and the resistance to procuring information are itself revealing.

Most of all, the insertion of an economic exclusion clause was the primary way in which elite resistance to the major goals of reservation sought to deprive it of its efficacy. For many years, opponents of reservation had argued that caste was irrelevant, that while admittedly the ``ex-untouchables'' and ``tribals'' might require some compensation, the large sections classified as ``backward classes'', that is the ex-Shudras, in fact contained wealthy and affluent sections. Rich farmers, rich cowherders, rich barbers, and rich washermen - all of these, it was argued, were the biggest enemies of Dalits. The opposition to reservation clothed itself in marxist dress, saying that reservation should be based if anything on ``economic backwardness'' - that is to say, on ``class' as an economic category. This had even been the major theme of the Left for many years, with West Bengal being one of the laggards in any kind of State-level compensatory discrimination policy. The phrase ``socially and educationally backward classes'' referring to the ex-Shudra sections, seemed to provide an opening - although throughout the British period terms like ``Depressed Classes'' and ``Backward Classes'' had invariably been used to refer to jatis.Backed up by this seemingly disinterested support of a mechanical marxism, the Indian elite grabbed on to the notion that the ``affluent OBCs'' should be excluded from the benefits of reservations.

What is wrong, it may be asked, with this? First, there is no country in the world outside of India that has accepted the notion that Government employment is a logical or legitimate way of dealing with the problems of poverty! The whole concept is somewhat fantastic; removing poverty requires broad-level economic policies, including those for growth and those directed at mass education and mass access to resources including land and forest wealth. Taking a few of the poor out of poverty by providing Government employment for them is a mockery. The principle of ``compensatory discrimination'' is meant to be applicable to ``ethnic'' (or non-class) social groups or communities which have been, for various historical reasons, systematically excluded from wealth and positions of power in society. This does not apply to the processes of simple class stratification.

But, in giving its assent to the Government order for implementation of the Mandal Commission report, the Supreme Court in 1992 not only limited overall reservation to 50 per cent (thereby in effect reserving 50 per cent for the ``forward castes''), but also inserted an economic exclusion clause under the name of ``creamy layer''. The term itself was a clever innovation, implying that by ``skimming off the cream'' a rather healthier glass of milk could be made available. The term ``creamy layer'' was used both to refer to the slightly better off economically among the backward castes (luckily this could not be applied to the Dalits and Adivasis) and to better off jatis among them.

The costs to the nation of inserting the ``creamy layer'' exclusion clause have been considerable. Financial and administrative costs have mounted with the continual national and State-level Government commissions designed to set up criteria for determining a ``creamy layer'', with continual court cases focussing on this issue. The Supreme Court has even forced States such as Kerala, whose own experts had determined that there was no ``creamy layer'' in the State, to find one, regardless - or be liable for ``contempt of court''. All of this has provided considerable employment for social science ``experts'' but it has added little to the information available about caste and occupation in India. It has certainly stalled implementation of the Mandal Commission recommendations.

If the ``creamy layer'' clause were actually enforced rigorously at determined levels, it would have the effect of excluding today even children of Class III Government employees or moderately well-off farmers. But it is not of course rigorously enforced; it has simply added to the burden of bribery upon those hoping for employment for their children and has provided another source of under-the-table income for the local-level officials who provide the certificates.

Thus the reservation system was instituted not so much on the basis of the Constitution as on that of the decades-old elite resistance to restructuring public employment. It serves several purposes. It allows the elite to maintain the facade of a generous patron of Dalits and Adivasis while continuing to deprive them of mass-level education and access to resource. It provides a process to absorb some of their brightest members into a system still based more on extortion and corruption than true public service. Finally, it continues to block a true representation of the majority of the nation's population, a representation which the founders and leaders of the anti-caste movement had always seen as part of a full-scale political and social-economic transformation.

Reservation in India:

The Indian government provides Affirmative action whereby a percentage of posts are reserved in employment in Government and in the public sector units, and in all public and private educational institutions. But there is no quota system that exists in the religious/ linguistic minority educational institutions, in order to mitigate the perceived backwardness of the Other Backward Classes and the Scheduled Castes and Tribes. Scheduled caste and Scheduled Tribes are those people in India that are part of the lowest caste, considered ‘untouchable’ in orthodox Hindu scriptures and practice, officially regarded as socially disadvantaged. The reservation policy is also extended to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes for representation in the Parliament of India. The central government of Indiareserves 27% of higher education[1], and individual states may legislate further reservations. Reservation cannot be exceeded 50%, as per the rulings given by the supreme court[2], but certain Indian states like Rajasthan have proposed a 68 % reservation which includes a 14% reservation for forward castes.[3] Reservations are intended to increase the social diversity in campuses and workplaces by lowering the entry criteria for certain identifiable groups that are grossly under-represented in proportion to their numbers in the general population. Caste is the most used criteria to identify under-represented groups. However there are other identifiable criteria for under-representation—gender (women are under represented), state of domicile (North Eastern States, as Bihar and Uttar Pradesh are under-represented), rural people, etc. -- as revealed by the Government of India sponsored National Family Health and National Sample surveys. The underlying theory is that the under-representation of the identifiable groups is a legacy of the Indian caste system. After India gained independence, the Constitution of India listed some erstwhile groups as Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST). The framers of the Constitution believed that, due to the caste system, SCs and the STs were historically oppressed and denied respect and equal opportunity in Indian society and were thus under-represented in nation-building activities. The Constitution laid down 15% and 7.5% of vacancies to government aided educational institutes and for jobs in the government/public sector, as reserved quota for the SC and ST candidates respectively for a period of five years, after which the situation was to be reviewed. This period was routinely extended by the succeeding governments. Later, reservations were introduced for other sections as well. The Supreme Court ruling that reservations cannot exceed 50% (which it judged would violate equal access guaranteed by the Constitution) has put a cap on reservations. However, there are state laws that exceed this 50% limit and these are under litigation in the Supreme Court. For example, the caste-based reservation fraction stands at 69% and is applicable to about 87% of the population in the state of Tamil Nadu.

In Pre-Independence India

Reservations in favour of Backward Classes (BCs) were introduced long before Independence in a large area, comprising the Presidency areas and the Princely States south of the Vindhyas. Chatrapati Sahuji Maharaj, Maharaja of Kolhapur in Maharashtra introduced reservation in favour of backward classes as early as 1902 to eradicate poverty from amongst them and to give them their due share in the State administration. The notification of 1902 created 50% reservation in services for backward classes/communities in the State of Kolhapur. This is the first official instance (Government Order) providing for reservation for depressed classes in India.

The concept of untouchability was not practiced uniformly throughout the country, therefore the identification of oppressed classes was difficult to carry out. Allegedly, the practice of segregation and untouchabilityprevailed more in the southern parts of India as opposed to in Northern India. Furthermore, certain castes/ communities, considered "untouchable" in one province were not in other provinces.

Medieval chronicles contain description of communities located in various parts of the country. During the British colonial period, listings were undertaken after 1806, on an extensive scale. The process gathered momentum in course of the censuses from 1881 to 1931.

India is divided into many endogamous groups, or castes and sub-castes, as a result of centuries of practicing a form of social hierarchy (caste system). Proponents of reservation policy say that the traditional caste system, as practised, leads to severe oppression and segregation of the lower castes and limits their access to various freedoms, including education. Caste, according to ancient scriptures such as "Manu Smriti", is "Varnasrama Dharma", which translates to "offices given according to class or occupation". The practice of caste in India followed this rule.

The continuous efforts of some of the social reformers of the country viz. Rettamalai Srinivasa Paraiyar, Ayothidas Pandithar, Jyotiba Phule, Babasaheb Ambedkar, Chhatrapati Sahu ji Maharaj and others, continually strived to eradicate "casteism".

• • 1882 - Hunter Commission appointed. Mahatma Jyotirao Phule made a demand of free and compulsory education for all along with proportionate reservation/representation in government jobs.
  • 1891 - The demand for reservation of government jobs with an agitation (in the princely State of Travancore) against the recruitment of non-natives into public service overlooking qualified native people.
  • 1901 - Reservations were introduced in Maharashtra (in the Princely State of Kolhapur) by Shahu Maharaj. Reservations in the princely states of Baroda and Mysore were already in force.
  • 1908 - Reservations were introduced in favour of a number of castes and communities that had little share in the administration by the British.
  • 1909 - Provisions were made in the Indian Councils Act 1909
  • 1919 - Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms introduced.
  • 1919 - Provisions were made in the Government of India Act 1919
  • 1921 - Madras Presidency introduces Communal G O in which reservation of 44 per cent for non-Brahmins, 16 per cent for Brahmins, 16 per cent for Muslims, 16 per cent for Anglo-Indians/ Christians and eight per cent for Scheduled Castes.
  • 1935 - Indian national congress passes resolution called Poona Pact to allocate separate electoral constituencies for depressed classes.
  • 1935 - Provisions in Government of India Act 1935.
  • 1942 - B.R. Ambedkar established the All India Depressed Classes federation to support the advancement of the scheduled castes. He also demanded reservations for the Scheduled castes in government services and education.
  • 1946 - 1946 Cabinet Mission to India proposes proportionate representation with several other recommendations.
  • 1947 - India obtained Independence. Dr. Ambedkar was appointed chairman of the drafting committee for Indian Constitution. The Indian constitution prohibits discrimination on the grounds only of religion, race,caste, sex and place of birth. While providing equality of opportunity for all citizens, the constitution contains special clauses "for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes". Separate constituencies allocated to Scheduled Castes and Tribes to ensure their political representation for 10 years.(These were subsequently extended for every 10 years through constitutional amendments).

Post-Independence India

• 1947–1950 - Debates of the Constituent Assembly.
• 26/01/1950-The Constitution of India came in force.
• 1953 - Kalelkar Commission was established to assess the situation of the socially and educationally backward class. The report was accepted as far as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes were concerned. The recommendations for OBC's were rejected.
• 1956 - Schedules amended as per Kaka Kalelkar report.
• 1976 - Schedules amended.
• 1979 - Mandal Commission was established to assess the situation of the socially and educationally backward. The commission didn't have exact figures for a sub-caste, known as the Other Backward Class(OBC), and used the 1930 census data, further classifying 1,257 communities as backward, to estimate the OBC population at 52%.
• 1980 - the commission submitted a report, and recommended changes to the existing quotas, increasing them from 22% to 49.5%.As of 2006 number of castes in Backward class list went up to 2297 which is the increase of 60% from community list prepared by Mandal commission.
• 1990 - Mandal commission recommendations were implemented in Government Jobs by Vishwanath Pratap Singh. Student Organisations launched nationwide agitations. Rajiv Goswami Delhi university student attempted self-immolation. Many students followed suit.
• 1991 - Narasimha Rao Government introduced 10% separate reservation for Poor Among Forward Castes.
• 1992 - Supreme court upheld reservations to Other backward classes in Indira Sawhney Case. Also see Reservations and Judiciary section
• 1995 - Parliament by 77th Constitutional amendment inserted Art 16(4) (A) permitting reservation in promotions to the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes. Later it was further amended to include consequential seniority by 85th amendment.
• 1998 - Central Government conducted large nationwide survey for the first time to estimate economical and educational status of various social groups.. The National Sample Survey puts the figure at 32%. There is substantial debate over the exact number of OBC's in India, with census data compromised by partisan politics. It is generally estimated to be sizable, but lower than the figures quoted by either the Mandal Commission or and national Sample Survey . Mandal commission has been criticised of fabricating the data. National surveys indicated that status of OBC is comparable to Forward castes in many areas.
• 12 August 2005 - The Supreme Court delivered a unanimous judgement by 7 judges on 12 August 2005 in the case of P.A. Inamdar & Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. declaring that the State can't impose its reservation policy on minority and non-minority unaided private colleges, including professional colleges.
• 2005 - 93rd Constitutional amendment brought for ensuring reservations to other backward classes and Scheduled castes and Tribes in Private Educational institutions. This effectively reversed the 2005 August Supreme Court judgement.
• 2006 - The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in M. Nagraj & Ors Vs. Union of India & Ors upheld the constitutional validity of Art 16(4) (A), 16(4) (B) and proviso to Art 335.
• 2006 - Reservations introduced for Other backward classes in Central Government Educational Institutions. Total Reservation went up to 49.5%. Also See Recent Development.
• 2007 - Supreme Court give stayed on OBC reservation in Central Government Educational Institutions.
• 2008 - The Supreme Court of India on 10 April 2008, upheld the Government's move for initiating 27% OBC quotas in Government funded institutions. The Court has categorically reiterated its prior stand that "Creamy Layer" should be excluded from the ambit of reservation policy. The Supreme Court avoided answering the question whether reservations can be made in private institutions, stating that the question will be decided only as and when a law is made making reservations in private institutions. The verdict produced mixed reactions from supporting and opposing quarters. Several criteria to identify creamy layer has been recommended, which are as follows: Those with family income above Rs 250,000 a year should be in creamy layer, and excluded from the reservation quota. Also, children of doctors, engineers, chartered accountants, actors, consultants, media professionals, writers, bureaucrats, defence officers of colonel and equivalent rank or higher, high court and Supreme Court judges, all central and state government Class A and B officials. The court has requested Parliament to exclude MPs’ and MLAs’ children, too.
• 2010 - The Supreme Court held that if the state wants to frame rules with regard to reservation in promotions and consequential seniority it has to satisfy itself with quantifiable data that is there is backwardness, inadequacy of representation in public employment and overall administrative inefficiency and unless such an exercise was undertaken by the state government the rules in promotions and consequential seniority cannot be introduced.

Relevant Cases

1. See Arts 12, 14, 15, 16, 19, 335 of the Constitution of India.
2. State of Madras Vs. Smt. Champakam Dorairanjan AIR 1951 SC 226
3. General Manager, S. Rly v. Rangachari AIR 1962 SC 36
4. M R Balaji v. State of Mysore AIR 1963 SC 649
5. T. Devadasan v Union AIR 1964 SC 179.
6. C. A. Rajendran v. Union of India AIR 1965 SC 507.
7. Chamaraja v Mysore AIR 1967 Mys 21
8. Barium Chemicals Ltd. Vs Company Law Board AIR 1967 SC 295
9. P. Rajendran Vs. State of Madras AIR 1968 SC 1012
10. Triloki Nath Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir AIR 1969 SC 1
11. State of Punjab vs. Hira Lal 1970(3) SCC 567
12. State of A.P. Vs U.S.V. Balram AIR 1972 SC 1375
13. Kesavanand Bharti v St of Kerala AIR 1973 SC 1461
14. State of Kerala Vs N. M. Thomas AIR 1976 SC 490 : (1976) 2 SCC 310
15. Jayasree Vs. State of Kerala AIR 1976 SC 2381
16. Minerva Mills Ltd Vs Union (1980) 3 SCC 625 : AIR 1980 SC 1789
17. Ajay Hasia v Khalid Mujib AIR 1981 SC 487
18. Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karamchari Sangh Vs Union (1981) 1 SCC 246
19. K. C. Vasant Kumar v. Karnataka AIR 1985 SC 1495
20. Comptroller & Auditor-General of India, Gian Prakash Vs K. S. Jaggannathan (1986) 2 SCC 679
21. Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs A. P. State Electricity Board (1991) 3SCC 299
22. Indira Sawhney & Ors v. Union of India AIR 1993 SC 477 : 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217
23. Unni Krishnan v. State of A.P. and Ors. (1993 (1) SCC 645)
24. R K Sabharwal Vs St of Punjab AIR 1995 SC 1371 : (1995) 2 SCC 745
25. Union of India Vs Varpal Singh AIR 1996 SC 448
26. Ajitsingh Januja & Ors Vs State of Punjab AIR 1996 SC 1189
27. Ashok Kumar Gupta: Vidyasagar Gupta Vs State of Uttar Pradesh. 1997 (5) SCC 201
28. Jagdish Lal and others v. State of Haryana and Others (1997) 6 SCC 538
29. Chander Pal & Ors Vs State of Haryana (1997) 10 SCC 474
30. Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh Vs. Faculty Association 1998 AIR(SC) 1767 : 1998 (4) SCC 1
31. Ajitsingh Januja & Ors Vs State of Punjab & Ors AIR 1999 SC 3471
32. Indira Sawhney Vs. Union of India. AIR 2000 SC 498
33. M G Badappanvar Vs St of Karnataka 2001(2) SCC 666 : AIR 2001 SC 260
34. T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka (2002) 8 SCC 481
35. NTR University of Health Science Vijaywada v. G Babu Rajendra Prasad (2003) 5 SCC 350
36. Islamic Academy of Education & Anr. v. State of Karnataka & Ors. (2003) 6 SCC 697
37. Saurabh Chaudri & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. (2003) 11 SCC 146
38. P.A. Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra 2005 AIR(SC) 3226
39. I.R. Coelho (Dead) by LRS. Vs. State of T.N. 2007 (2) SCC 1 : 2007 AIR(SC) 861
40. M. Nagraj & Ors v. Union of India and Ors. AIR 2007 SC 71
41. Ashok Kumara Thakur Vs Union of India. 2008
42. K. Manorama Vs Union of India.(2010) 10 SCC 323.
43. Suraj Bhan Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan (2011) 1 SCC 467.

Different criteria for Reservation

Seats in educational institutions and jobs are reserved based on a variety of criteria. The quota system sets aside a proportion of all possible positions for members of a specific group. Those not belonging to the designated communities can compete only for the remaining positions, while members of the designated communities can compete for all positions (reserved and open).

For example, when 2 out of 10 clerical positions in railways are reserved for ex-servicemen, those who have served in the Army can compete both in the General Category as well as in the specific quota.

Caste based

Seats are reserved for Schedules Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Castes (based chiefly on caste at birth) in varying ratio by the central government and state government. This caste is decided based on birth, and can never be changed.

In central government funded higher education institutions, 22.5% of available seats are reserved for Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) students (15% for SCs, 7.5% for STs). This reservation percentage has been raised to 49.5%, by including an additional 27% reservation for OBCs. This ratio is followed even in Parliament and all elections where a few constituencies are earmarked for those from certain communities (which keeps rotating as per the Delimitation Commission).

The exact percentages differ from state to state :

• • In Tamil Nadu, the percentage of reservation is 28% for SCs and 8% for STs, being based on local demographics.
  • In Andhra Pradesh, 25% of educational institutes and government jobs for BCs, 15% for SCs, 6% for STs and 4% for Muslims.
  • In West Bengal, 35% of educational institutes and 45% of government jobs for SC,ST, and OBC.(25% SC, 12% ST, and 8% Muslim).

Gender based

Women's reservations Women get 33% reservation in gram panchayat (village assembly - a form of local village government) and municipal elections. There is a long-term plan to extend this reservation to parliament and legislative assemblies. For instance, some law schools in India have a 30% reservation for females. Progressive political opinion in India is strongly in favor of providing preferential treatment to women in order to create a level playing field for all of its citizens.

The Women's reservation Bill was passed by the Rajya Sabha on 9 March 2010 by a majority vote of 186 members in favor and 1 against. It will now be forwarded to the Lok Sabha, and if passed there, would be implemented.

Religion based

The Tamil Nadu government has allotted 3.5% of seats each to Muslims and Christians, thereby altering the OBC reservation to 23% from 30% (since it excludes persons belonging to Other Backward Castes who are either Muslims or Christians).

Andhra Pradesh's administration has introduced a law enabling 4% reservations for Muslims. (contested in court) Kerala Public Service Commission has a quota of 12% for Muslims. Religious minority status educational institutes also have 50% reservation for their particular religions. The Central government has listed a number of Muslim communities as backward Muslims, making them eligible for reservation.

Minorities based

Most of the minority institutions reserve a large number of seats (Sometimes up to 50%) for students of their religion. Jamia Milia Islamia (50% for Muslims), St. Stephens (50% for Christians) are two prime examples. Similarly most of the missionary schools and colleges (St. paul, St. xavier etc.)have de-facto reservation for Christian students.

State of domiciles

With few exceptions, all jobs under state government are reserved to those who are domiciles under that government. In Punjab Engineering College, Chandigarh, earlier 85% of seats were reserved for Chandigarh domiciles and now it is 50%. There are also some seat reserved for Jammu and Kashmir migrants in every Government aided educational institute

Undergraduate colleges

Institutes have a policy of reserving postgraduate seats for those who completed their undergraduation in said Institute. [AIIMS] used to reserve 33% of its 120 postgraduate seats for the 40 undergraduate students i.e. everyone who had completed MBBS in AIIMS was assured a postgraduate seat, which was judged illegal by a Court.

Other criteria

Some reservations are also made for:

• Sons/Daughters/Grandsons/Granddaughters of Freedom Fighters.
• Physically handicapped.
• Sports personalities.
• Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) have a small fraction of reserved seats in educational institutions. (Note : NRI reservations were removed from IIT in 2003).
• Candidates sponsored by various organizations.
• Those who have served in the armed forces (ex-serviceman quota).
• Dependents of armed forces personnel killed in action.
• Repatriates.
• Reservation in special schools of Government Undertakings /PSUs meant for the children of their employees (e.g. Army schools, PSU schools, etc.).
• Paid pathway reservations in places of worship (e.g. Tirupathi Balaji Temple, Tiruthani Murugan (Balaji) temple).
• Seat reservation for Senior citizens/ PH in Public Bus transport.

Relaxations

In view of the fact that several of the top undergraduate and graduate institutions in India, such as the IITs, the IIMs are among the most selective in the world, it is not surprising that most reservation criteria are applied at the stage of entrance examinations for these institutions. Some of the criteria are relaxed for reserved categories, while others are completely eliminated. Examples include:

1. The minimum high school marks criteria are relaxed for reserved seats.
2. Age
3. Fees, Hostel Room Rent etc.

It is important to note, however, that the criteria required to graduate from an institution are never relaxed.

Population data

Main articles: Scheduled Castes and Tribes, Other Backward Classes, and Forward Castes

**NFHS Survey estimated only Hindu OBC population.Total OBC population derived by assuming Muslim OBC population in same proportion as Hindu OBC population )

SC/ST

Only SC/ST population details are collected in Indian census. The SC/ST population is 24.4%.

Other Backward Classes

After 1931,caste data is not collected for non SC/ST caste-groups in census. Mandal commission estimated OBC population based on 1931 census as 52%.There is an ongoing controversy about the estimation logic used by Mandal commission for calculating OBC population. Famous psephologist and researcher, Dr. Yogendra Yadav of the CSDS [who is a known votary of Affirmative Action] agrees that there is no empirical basis to the Mandal figure. According to him "It is a mythical construct based on reducing the number of SC/ST, Muslims and others and then arriving at a number."

National Sample Survey's 1999–2000 (NSS 99-00) round estimated around 36 per cent of the country's population is defined as belonging to the Other Backward Classes (OBC). The proportion falls to 32 per cent on excluding Muslim OBCs. A survey conducted in 1998 by National Family Health Statistics (NFHS) puts the proportion of non-Muslim OBCs as 29.8 per cent. These surveys are considered as large by Oversight committee in its final report and by Dr. Yogendra Yadav. Oversight committee has used these surveys extensively in its final report. State population of backward classes in NSS 99-00 can be found in other section of this article.

Arguments offered by supporters of reservation

Arguments offered by supporters of reservation

1. More than a thousand years of discrimination has laid barren groups of people without education, hygienic and healthy living. People who were not given education could now sense a freedom that could come up to them. But then, they are not ready for the new responsibilities. At the dawn of independence and even before, forward looking leaders could see that the country could not progress unless the masses consisting primarily of these people could progress. Even today, the growing GDP has really no impact on the people who are going hungry to bed every night.

2. If 60 years of reservation could be so difficult to withstand and could make life miserable for the so-called forward classes, imagine what 1000 years of subversion with absolutely no choice and absolutely no voice, would have done to a human race.

3. The government at the time of independence could bring in only reservations on the education front and in a majority of the government offices. This does not have any significance beyond certain levels in government offices, military and other areas of work. Similarly, it does not have any significance when it comes to private industry which is the largest employer today. Contrast this with the affirmative action in other countries, say UK for instance. The population racial spread should match with the industry spread. That is to say, if the race is occupying 30% of the population, the same set or about the same percentage of people should be in every industry such as banking, media, etc., at all levels of management. If a company, be it private or public, if for any reason or not finding themselves in line with this concept will have to pay an additional tax to the government. Please see ethnic quotas in the UK's affirmative action bill.

4. It has never been possible for India to bring any standard reservation policy with a clear cut end marked out. This is so because, people who are anti to reservations and who occupy the top positions in the hierarchy are not allowing census to be taken on a caste basis. Secondly, data pertaining to caste wise hierarchical data is not specifically made available for public consumption. The current census looks forward to make good this lacuna at last.

5. Reservations can end only when the population map of the castes match with the caste wise industry map. That is if a specific group forms 12% of the population, then they should be occupying more or less the same percentage in, say, banks at all levels, in top management map, middle management map and in lower levels as well. Only then, it can be said that equality has reached. Instead if you take media today, be it government or otherwise, one would only find the upper class domination and naturally, no other idea gets spread as well.

6.There is a general perception that the quality of education is compromised when reservations are in place. But there are many instances where it has been disproved. In India, particularly, there has been mushrooming of education institutions across the country. Where there were only 2000 seats in a state (Tamil Nadu Engineering in 1970s), now offers more than 100,000 seats for similar programs. Even with reservations, the number of seats for forward caste students and for others have increased by more than 50 times. But still, upper castes remark of insufficiency of seats to the upper castes! This is happening all over the country. The same is the case with government jobs.

7.Poor people from "forward castes" do not have any social or economical advantage over rich people from backward caste.

Counter Point: Reservation is a tool to improve representation. It is not a poverty alleviation program.

8.Providing quotas on the basis of an accident of birth and not on the basis of competitive merit will be discriminatory to talented students, and weaken the country's competitive edge.

Counter Point: Merit is an abstract notion and a social construct.

9.This policy of the government has already caused increase in brain drain and may aggravate further. Under graduates and graduates will start moving to foreign universities for higher education.

Counter Point: Upper caste Indians were well known for the immigration pattern even before the dusk of the British Raj. Celebration of golden jubilee of IIT was celebrated in San Jose, California not because the they couldn't make it to the IIT but only after there graduation. In contrast Tamil diaspora to nations like Malaysia and Singapore at the end of the Slave trade was made possible due to the suppression of this population as lower caste and their look for greener pastures.

Therefore, reservations are a political necessity in India because vast influential sections of voting population see reservations as beneficial to themselves. All governments have supported maintaining and/or increasing reservations. Since there is a wide spread support to reservations, even if the governments are not sincere about the purpose of the reservations, they make it appear as if they are for reservations. And this has been happening in this country resulting in a half-hearted implementation of reservations that has not produced any worthwhile results even after 60 years of implementation.

Reservations are legal and binding. As shown by Gujjar agitations (Rajasthan, 2007–2008), increasing reservations is also essential for peacekeeping in India.

Quality of education and quality of government service has fallen not because of reservations but because weak leadership and management capability and a systemic failure of government machinery which does not know how to manage its own staff. A bad policy in the initial years when the government instead of being a servant of the public turned to be the biggest employer in the country, resulting in gross under employment and mismanagement. That weakened the system and therefore, service quality.

One of the biggest difference of affirmative actions in the west and that of the Indian Government is that the people who suppressed the others never acknowledged the same. In the west, whites acknowledged that they are subjecting the blacks to mistreatment and slavery and that this has resulted in a situation that where the growth of blacks have been affected. In India, till today, never have the leaders of the forward castes ever expressed any apology for 2500 years of suppression. Nor have they expressed that these suppressed castes should be brought up for the growth of the country. Even if any one makes such a statement, it is more a lip service than real concern. There has never been a Lincoln in India who would take guns against his own race or caste to fight for the freedom of the oppressed.

Affirmative Action schemes are in place in many countries including USA, South Africa, Malaysia, Brazil etc. It was researched in Harvard University that Affirmative Action programmes are beneficial to the under-privileged.The studies said that Blacks who enter elite institutions with lower test scores and grades than those of whites achieve notable success after graduation. They earn advanced degrees at rates identical to those of their white classmates. They are even slightly more likely than whites from the same institutions to obtain professional degrees in law, business and medicine. They become more active than their white classmates in civic and community activities.

Affirmative Action has helped many - if not everyone from under-privileged and/or under-represented communities to grow and occupy top positions in the world's leading industries. (See the Section on Tamil Nadu) Reservation in education is not THE solution, it is just one of the many solutions. Reservations is a means to increase representation of hitherto under-represented caste groups and thereby improve diversity on campus.

Reservations are needed to provide social justice to the most marginalized and underprivileged is our duty and their human right. Reservation will really help these marginalized people to lead successful lives, thus eliminating caste-based discrimination which is still widely prevalent in India especially in the rural areas. (about 60% of Indian population stays in Villages)

Anti-reservationists have made a gross mix-up between brain-drain and reservation. Brain-drain is mainly attributed to the "want" to become more rich very fast. Even if we assume that reservation could be a fraction of the cause, one must understand that brain-drain is a concept which is meaningless without nationalism, which is separatism from humankind as a whole. If people leave the country whining about reservation, they don't have enough nationalism and brain-drain does not apply to them.

There are concerns among anti-reservationists about meritrocracy and aptly so. But meritrocracy is meaningless without equality. First all people must be brought to the same level, whether it elevates a section or delevels another, regardless of merit. After that, we can talk about merit. Forward pople have never known to go backward due to reservations or lack of "meritrocracy". Reservations have only slowed down the process of "Forward becoming more richer and backward becoming more poorer". In China, people are equal by birth. In Japan, everyone is highly qualified, so a qualified man finishes his work fast and comes for labour work for which one gets paid more. So the forward people must be at least happy with the fact that they are white-collared throughout their life.

The current idea of meritocracy is highly indignant. Merit today is scoring high marks in an examination and education system that is best described, insipid. Educationists have grown to see that one cannot train or educate every one the same way. And every education system should find out what is the person good at and educate him accordingly. A sweeping education system which does not differentiate the requirement of an artist and that of an engineer cannot be called the right education. Meritocracy based on such an education system cannot be called the ultimate guide to identifying the good, bad and the ugly.

Though its true that poverty exists among the people of the so-called higher caste too,but their poverty is only economic poverty,and still they are at par with society.Whereas people from the so-called backward caste are not only economically poor but also socially backwards.Still untouchability and caste based discrimination is rampant in India,especially is Villages.And 60% of India is rural based.

1000yrs ago, castes were created and continued till now. And due to this people from backward castes were ill treated and exploited to the point of untouchability which still exists now. They were not allowed inside educational institutions nor inside the places of worship(Temples).They were forcibly cut off from mainstream of the society.Various restrictions were imposed on them and were deemed as lower caste and subhuman.For further reference,take a look at Caste system in India

To understand this better take a hypothetical example of a family-:

If a person is cruelly ill-treated and badly exploited and rendered untouchable,then that person obviously lags behind in the race of success and better life style,as he was never allowed to get education nor was he allowed to enter the temple,nor allowed to use the same well for water,and many such restrictions imposed on him,which resulted in his being cut off from the main section of the society.The same was imposed on his family too.Due to such restrictions and oppression,he wouldn't be able to give a better life to his children.Obviously he would fail to do so because if he spent all his lifetime toiling hard for other people of so-called higher section of the society for negligible wages and due to the oppression had to be trodden under huge debt.So his children and grandchildren faced the same discrimination by the society and this cycle continues for many generations of that family.Continuous discrimination and ill treatment to the generations of that family would generally make them backward and create a huge gap between them and the rest of the society.So obviously they would be poor and backward and cut off from the main section of the society,because they would have never known what is it to have a life with the kind of benefits that the remaining families of the society enjoy.

Suddenly one day,this discrimination is made illegal by law but still it remained in the people's psyche.And then the current generation of that family are told that discrimination is made illegal now by law and that now they can compete with others but how could they compete as they have never been provided with the kind of facilities that their other competitors had.Obviously they would lag behind because they never had the same facility which others had,not only financially but also socially.So now the equality given to that family becomes meaningless,because they are struggling hard for just two square meals.So this equality meant nothing to them even to the brightest of their lot because they were busy struggling for basic amenities.

So they lag behind inspite of the equality given because a history of discrimination has made the family poor and cut off from the mainstream of the society.So they lag behind and could not make any use of the equality given to them by law.So for their benefit,special chances were given to bring the family into mainstream and some members of that family struggled hard and made only one of their son educated now.But still he could not go far as the social barriers still existed and alone he could not go far due to the poverty and social backwardness that still existed in his family. So to make sure that if some members of that family join the mainstream then maybe then they can be uplifted.So special provisions were made till maximum members of that family comes forward and join the mainstream of the society.And when maximum members join the mainstream of the society then that special provision would be cut off.

This hypothetical example explains the reason and cause for the special provisions for the people from the backward caste.The situation of the hpothetical family shown in the example is the reality of the of the so-called backward section of the society.To remove this discrimination,and to bring them at par with the rest of the society,special provisions for them is a necessity.

Arguments offered by anti-reservationists

• Allocating quotas is a form of discrimination which is contrary to the right to equality.

• There is great confusion in the "pro-reservation camp". While they clamour for 33% reservation for women in parliament and state legislatures [and do not accept caste quotas as part of women's quotas], they do not want special consideration for women in quotas in higher education. This is implicit acceptance of the fact that there are multiple factors of exclusion and discrimination at work in society.

• The policy of reservation has never been subject to a widespread social or political audit. Before extending reservation to more groups, the entire policy needs to be properly examined, and its benefits over a span of nearly 60 years have to be gauged.

• Providing quotas on the basis of an accident of birth and not on the basis of competitive merit will be discriminatory to talented students, and weaken the country's competitive edge.

• Poor people from "forward castes" do not have any social or economical advantage over rich people from backward caste.

• Combination of factors like Wealth, Income, Occupation etc. will help to identify real needy people. Most often, only the economically sound people make use of most of the seats reserved for "backward" castes, thus making the aim a total failure.

Quoting reservations as a reason for growth of Tamil Nadu & other southern states is not logical. Growth can come only by increasing capacity and improving infrastructure whereas Reservation only divides existing available resources. Reservation in Tamil Nadu has existed for 85 years, but the progress rate has gone up only for the last 20 years).[22] This could be easily attributed to Mid-day meals (which increased primary school enrollment), liberalization of higher education (the number of engineering colleges has gone up from 11 to 250), and IT revolution providing new job opportunities. All these happened in the last 20-25 years synonymous with its progress history. Gujarat, Haryana, Maharastra and Punjab were able to prosper even without exorbitant reservations for decades together like Tamil Nadu. States with high percentage of reservation does not show any significant growth difference in comparison with states which does not follow high% of reservation.

• There is fear that reservation once introduced will never be withdrawn even if there is a proof for upliftment of Backward classes, due to political issues. For example, in Tamil Nadu, forward castes were able to secure only 3% of total seats (and 9% in Open Competition) in professional institutions at Undergraduate level as against their population percentage of 13%.. This is a clear case of reverse discrimination.

• Many cite the Mandal Commission report while supporting the idea of reservations. According to the Mandal commission, 52% of the Indians belong to OBC category, whle according to National Sample Survey 1999-2000, this figure is only 36% (32% excluding Muslim OBCs).

• This policy of the government has already caused increase in brain drain and may aggravate further. Under graduates and graduates will start moving to foreign universities for higher education.

Based on NSS 99-00. NSS calculated Rural & Urban BC's separately. Weighting for Rural and Urban applied statewise as in the 2001 census. Backward castes can also compete in Open competition apart from 27% exclusive reservation India is a country with BC Population ranging from 1% in some North Eastern states to 66% in Tamil Nadu with many major states below 27%. Applying 27% reservation in central educational institutions all over India will deprive chances of other sections of population greatly. Already SC/ST reservation is available in all states equivalent to their population percentage. In Many Major states like Punjab, West Bengal, Haryana, Maharastra etc. Forward castes students admitted will be much less than their population in Reservation Era even if they secure 100% seats in Open competition. Reference chart given. Possible solution: As claimed by some states (incidentally Tamil Nadu, which is the center of the argument of in the reservation issue, being the first to state its claim) a Federal Republic system of government may be more suited for a varied and diverse nation like India.

References: http://adaniel.tripod.com/modernindia.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/7597109/Caste-discrimination-against-Indias-untouchables-is-an-international-issue.html

http://nasocommunity.com/whatiscastediscrimination.aspx

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/06/0602_030602_untouchables.html

Bindu,

bt10b011.