06-04-2007, 04:36 PM
SC had hinted at possible caste war
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Following are the extracts from that interim order:
<b>It has also to be noted that nowhere else in the world do castes, classes or communities queue up for the sake of gaining backward status. </b>
<b>Nowhere else in the world is there competition to assert backwardness and then to claim we are more backward than you. </b>
It is a settled legal position that the state is constitutionally empowered to enact affirmative-action measures to uplift backward classes. And, no one would protest the needy getting reservation, be it in employment or education.
If that is the general mindset, why politicise inclusion and non-inclusion of castes and classes in the lists of SCs, STs and OBCs â increasingly viewed as bonanza by the creamy layer among the backward communities.
In fact, the apex court had warned, "<b>Differentiation or classification for special preference must not be unduly unfair for the persons left out of the favoured groups.</b>" This means, the policy of reservation cannot be and should not be intended to be permanent or perpetuate backwardness at the cost of general category communities.
Only when the reservation policy changes its focus â from votebank politics to helping out the needy among backwards to stand on their feet â will we see less of the competition to be included in the most beneficial category to reap quota benefits. And, less of blood that is being spilled on the streets, as is being done by Gujjars and Meenas in Rajasthan.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Following are the extracts from that interim order:
<b>It has also to be noted that nowhere else in the world do castes, classes or communities queue up for the sake of gaining backward status. </b>
<b>Nowhere else in the world is there competition to assert backwardness and then to claim we are more backward than you. </b>
It is a settled legal position that the state is constitutionally empowered to enact affirmative-action measures to uplift backward classes. And, no one would protest the needy getting reservation, be it in employment or education.
If that is the general mindset, why politicise inclusion and non-inclusion of castes and classes in the lists of SCs, STs and OBCs â increasingly viewed as bonanza by the creamy layer among the backward communities.
In fact, the apex court had warned, "<b>Differentiation or classification for special preference must not be unduly unfair for the persons left out of the favoured groups.</b>" This means, the policy of reservation cannot be and should not be intended to be permanent or perpetuate backwardness at the cost of general category communities.
Only when the reservation policy changes its focus â from votebank politics to helping out the needy among backwards to stand on their feet â will we see less of the competition to be included in the most beneficial category to reap quota benefits. And, less of blood that is being spilled on the streets, as is being done by Gujjars and Meenas in Rajasthan.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->