Refining Reservation Policy

In February, just before the Election Commission announced the schedule for state elections, the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly adopted a bill to provide 10.5% reservation for Vanniyakul Kshatriyas Within the quota of Most Backward Classes (MBC) and Denotified Communities (DNC). In May, relying on the 102nd Constitutional Amendment, the Supreme Court reiterated the constitutional position that states do not have the power to identify “socially and educationally backward” classes (SEBCs). This drew strong reactions from political parties, which forced the Center to pass it in August 105th Amendment Which again empowers the states or union territories to prepare their own list of SEBCs. From this year, 27% of all India quota for admission to medical and dental courses 10% will be reserved for Other Backward Classes (OBC) and Economically Weaker Sections (EWS). This was the result of judicial intervention and legal battles by parties like AIADMK and DMK.

cap breach

All these developments have fueled the demand for caste based census and removal of 50 per cent cap on reservation. Its advocates argue that only a caste-based census can reveal the composition and numerical power of different castes. Considering this as Aadhaar, the 50% limit of reservation can be violated.

There have been some attempts of caste enumeration in the last 10 years, but they have not yielded the desired result. The 2011 socio-economic and caste census report was made public five years ago, but without caste data. In Karnataka, a similar exercise was started in 2015. The report is still not out. In Tamil Nadu, a one-man commission was constituted in December 2020 to collect data on castes. But after six months, the commission was terminated.

It is natural that political parties will not agree with the findings of a caste-based census – no matter how well conducted – if they feel that their perception of the strength of certain castes does not match the census findings. Is. Further, any such data alone, especially relating to OBCs, cannot be used as grounds for breaching the 50% cap on reservation. This is because there is no provision in the Constitution to add to the quantum of reservation for the OBC population.

A reading of clauses (4) and (5) of Article 15 of the Constitution and clause (4) of Article 16 shows that the scheme of reservation for SEBCs is permissible, but only for those OBCs who are “not adequately represented” Services in the State. as prescribed in Indira Sawhney case (1992), there must be to justify exceptional circumstances Quantum to cross the cap. Tamil Nadu is an excellent case where the 50% limit had already been breached. The state provides 69% quota for Backward Classes, MBC, Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST). But even in Tamil Nadu, the reservation plan was not made keeping in mind the population of the reserved communities. According to the Second Backward Classes Commission, the Backward Classes, MBCs and DNCs had about 67% of the population in the state, which is still used by the state government. Also, as per 2011 census, the share of SC and ST is 21.11%. Several other states have violated the border. They have also adopted 10% quota for EWS. However, while highlighting the reasons behind the backward classes, political parties should keep in mind the logic behind the limit. In the Maratha case of May 2021, the Supreme Court said: “A ceiling of 50 per cent has been set for reservation [the] Indira Sawhney The matter is based on the principle of equality enshrined in Article 16 of the Constitution.”

need for subclassing

Also, it is well known that the scheme of reservation suffers from anomalies. It needs to be refined. Primarily, if the benefits of reservation are equally distributed among the OBCs, sub-categorization is a prerequisite. Suggesting the creation of three sub-categories – Extremely Backward Classes, More Backward Classes and Backward Classes – the National Commission for Backward Classes in 2015 emphasized the need for “classification of OBCs” rather than streamlining the provisions on the creamy layer. Fair implementation of reservation policy. The Rohini Commission, set up by the Center in October 2017 for the purpose of sub-categorizing communities in the central list of OBCs, is expected to complete its work in three or four months. Some states and Puducherry have already completed the sub-classification.

Read also: quota and decision

The parties should also keep a fair eye on the concept of creamy layer. Fifty years ago, Tamil Nadu’s First Backward Classes Commission recommended that the “rich classes” should be “excluded from reservations” because of equality among backward classes. The annual income limit is one of the parameters determining the creamy layer. From September 1993, it was revised only five times against the norm of revision every three years. Apart from revising the income limit frequently, the central government, while revising the limit, must consider a number of factors such as the growth trend in GDP, inflation, per capita income and increase in cost of living. Despite there being a strong case for raising the existing limit of ₹8 lakh per annum for determination of creamy layer, the definition of income needs to be changed. At present, income from salary and agriculture are not considered, but “income from other sources” is taken into account. This stipulation on the nature of the source of income not only complicates the situation but is also unfair to candidates whose parents can earn marginally more “through other sources” than the upper income limit. This is clearly shown in a letter sent to the Commissioner of Revenue Administration by the secretary of the BC, MBC and Minorities Welfare Department of the Tamil Nadu government in July. According to the communication, apart from considering other parameters, district collectors should take into account how parents of candidates earn their annual income for the purpose of issuing OBC certificates. If the parent’s income is Rs 25 lakh by way of salary or Rs 50 lakh through agriculture, then such candidates will be given OBC certificate. But if parents earn ₹8.1 lakh through “other sources”, their son or daughter will not get the certificate.

Along with this, the vacancies of the posts of Other Backward Classes should also be filled soon. The parliamentary committee had said that as of January 1, 2016, the number of OBC employees in 78 ministries and departments of the central government was only 21.57 per cent against the quota of 27 per cent. With respect to Group A and B services, the share of OBCs was very low. This only underscores the need for frequent special drives by the Center to fill vacancies. Such an approach would take care of concerns in some sections that the objective of the 27% quota scheme may not be met by applying the “stringent norms” of the creamy layer.

If they are really concerned about social justice, all-inclusiveness and the plight of the underprivileged among OBCs, then instead of fighting on intangible issues, political parties should do their bit to make significant and qualitative changes in the way reservation is implemented. Energy must be used.

ramakrishnan.t@thehindu.co.in