06-18-2008, 08:58 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Economic quota makes sense </b>
Pioneer.com
Anuradha Dutt
Reservation based on economic and educational backwardness needs to be evolved
The National Commission For Scheduled Castes is reported to be on the verge of approving Justice Usha Mehra Commission's proposal for SC sub-categorisation. <b>The move apparently is meant to ensure equitable allocation of reservation among sub-groups since an elite pocket in the larger body of these people is accused of having appropriated the maximum befit till now. The same charge applies to other backward classes (OBCs), with dominant groups such as Jats, Yadavs and Kurmis said to be overshadowing the most backward classes</b>. Many among the former are wealthier than the upper castes on account of large land-holdings, while the poor among the twice-born lag behind. Clearly, reservation needs to be extended to all castes, as per the principle of social justice.
In the good old days -- before then Prime Minister VP Singh's implementation of the Mandal Commission report in August 1990 -- social fissures largely mirrored a class divide that could be overcome via upward mobility. Caste was relegated to the background in the urban psyche though, presumably, it retained a hold in the rustic backwaters. And there, too, its hold was far less virulent than it is today. Nothing illustrates this better than the Maoist movement in West Bengal in the late-1960s and early-1970s, when students and other young people from privileged backgrounds launched a war against class enemies -- rich landlords, industrialists, Government functionaries -- in their bid to establish a classless society. The downtrodden then were landless labourers, tribals and the wretchedly poor and oppressed.
Intellectual discourse in universities and coffeehouses revolved around high-minded idealism. Caste was not a factor since the crusaders for justice were driven by the ideal of economic parity, like revolutionaries in France and Russia during feudal times. This class war was insidiously replaced by a caste war by the late-1980s. That was a time, marked by the ascent of regional leaders, whose sudden rise was spurred by parochial sentiments, hinging on their caste and jati, and vast land-holdings of the concerned groups in their respective fiefdoms. Many of these satraps sported a socialist tag, finding refuge earlier in the Janata Party in the latter part of the 1970s. Their stint in power at the Centre was brief, from 1977 to 1979.
These regional chieftains sided with Congress renegades, headed by Mr VP Singh, and again regained some relevance in the late-1980s. Their party, the Janata Dal, ruled at the centre from 1989-90. Their casteist colours surfaced when Haryana strongman and Jat leader Devi Lal flexed his muscles at a huge farmers' rally. In a bid to counter him, Mr Singh hurriedly announced implementation of the Mandal report, supporting reservations for OBCs, which included Jats. The violent upper caste reaction to this decision and subsequent spurt in the campaign to restore the Ram janmabhoomi temple at Ayodhya led to the fall of the Janata Dal Government. But the casteist chieftains, whether Uttar Pradesh's and Bihar's Yadavs or Haryana's Jats, had managed to consolidate their position, with their communities solidly behind them. And, the Mandal report implicitly endorsed identity politics.
The focus thus shifted from class to caste, with the Supreme Court approving the suggested 27 per cent quota for OBCs in 1992, and again in Centrally funded educational institutions just a few weeks ago. The saving grace was that the verdict excluded the 'creamy layer' from the ambit of reservation. Now with Gujjars holding the country to ransom over their demands, the disastrous consequences of prioritising caste in policy-making are amply evident. Obsession with caste reflects a primitive feudal mindset that can easily derail development goals.
If reservation cannot be done away with in the existing set up, then new criteria, based on economic and educational backwardness, and cutting across caste lines, need to be evolved. A relevant excerpt from an essay, 'The Constitution and Reservation', by former Supreme Court judge Justice PB Sawant is given here:
<b>"Reservation has been provided in the Constitution for 'classes', not individuals. If individuals have to be provided with reservation on the economic criterion, then those satisfying the said criterion and belonging to any caste and social group, irrespective of any distinction, will be entitled to it... for such reservation will fall into the general category and all will be entitled to it, whether there is reservation on other grounds or not... Since economic criteria, whatever these may be, will run common through all the social groups, it will be contrary to the right to equality and, therefore, unconstitutional to keep them confined to any particular social group or groups."</b>
And that seems a fair solution.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Pioneer.com
Anuradha Dutt
Reservation based on economic and educational backwardness needs to be evolved
The National Commission For Scheduled Castes is reported to be on the verge of approving Justice Usha Mehra Commission's proposal for SC sub-categorisation. <b>The move apparently is meant to ensure equitable allocation of reservation among sub-groups since an elite pocket in the larger body of these people is accused of having appropriated the maximum befit till now. The same charge applies to other backward classes (OBCs), with dominant groups such as Jats, Yadavs and Kurmis said to be overshadowing the most backward classes</b>. Many among the former are wealthier than the upper castes on account of large land-holdings, while the poor among the twice-born lag behind. Clearly, reservation needs to be extended to all castes, as per the principle of social justice.
In the good old days -- before then Prime Minister VP Singh's implementation of the Mandal Commission report in August 1990 -- social fissures largely mirrored a class divide that could be overcome via upward mobility. Caste was relegated to the background in the urban psyche though, presumably, it retained a hold in the rustic backwaters. And there, too, its hold was far less virulent than it is today. Nothing illustrates this better than the Maoist movement in West Bengal in the late-1960s and early-1970s, when students and other young people from privileged backgrounds launched a war against class enemies -- rich landlords, industrialists, Government functionaries -- in their bid to establish a classless society. The downtrodden then were landless labourers, tribals and the wretchedly poor and oppressed.
Intellectual discourse in universities and coffeehouses revolved around high-minded idealism. Caste was not a factor since the crusaders for justice were driven by the ideal of economic parity, like revolutionaries in France and Russia during feudal times. This class war was insidiously replaced by a caste war by the late-1980s. That was a time, marked by the ascent of regional leaders, whose sudden rise was spurred by parochial sentiments, hinging on their caste and jati, and vast land-holdings of the concerned groups in their respective fiefdoms. Many of these satraps sported a socialist tag, finding refuge earlier in the Janata Party in the latter part of the 1970s. Their stint in power at the Centre was brief, from 1977 to 1979.
These regional chieftains sided with Congress renegades, headed by Mr VP Singh, and again regained some relevance in the late-1980s. Their party, the Janata Dal, ruled at the centre from 1989-90. Their casteist colours surfaced when Haryana strongman and Jat leader Devi Lal flexed his muscles at a huge farmers' rally. In a bid to counter him, Mr Singh hurriedly announced implementation of the Mandal report, supporting reservations for OBCs, which included Jats. The violent upper caste reaction to this decision and subsequent spurt in the campaign to restore the Ram janmabhoomi temple at Ayodhya led to the fall of the Janata Dal Government. But the casteist chieftains, whether Uttar Pradesh's and Bihar's Yadavs or Haryana's Jats, had managed to consolidate their position, with their communities solidly behind them. And, the Mandal report implicitly endorsed identity politics.
The focus thus shifted from class to caste, with the Supreme Court approving the suggested 27 per cent quota for OBCs in 1992, and again in Centrally funded educational institutions just a few weeks ago. The saving grace was that the verdict excluded the 'creamy layer' from the ambit of reservation. Now with Gujjars holding the country to ransom over their demands, the disastrous consequences of prioritising caste in policy-making are amply evident. Obsession with caste reflects a primitive feudal mindset that can easily derail development goals.
If reservation cannot be done away with in the existing set up, then new criteria, based on economic and educational backwardness, and cutting across caste lines, need to be evolved. A relevant excerpt from an essay, 'The Constitution and Reservation', by former Supreme Court judge Justice PB Sawant is given here:
<b>"Reservation has been provided in the Constitution for 'classes', not individuals. If individuals have to be provided with reservation on the economic criterion, then those satisfying the said criterion and belonging to any caste and social group, irrespective of any distinction, will be entitled to it... for such reservation will fall into the general category and all will be entitled to it, whether there is reservation on other grounds or not... Since economic criteria, whatever these may be, will run common through all the social groups, it will be contrary to the right to equality and, therefore, unconstitutional to keep them confined to any particular social group or groups."</b>
And that seems a fair solution.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->