Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
[hide]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk
Caste and community profile of people below the poverty line in India, as outlined in the Sachar Report
In August 1933, the Prime Minister of Britain, Ramsay Macdonald, introduced the Communal
Award, according to which separate representation was to be provided for
the Muslims, Sikhs, Indian Christians, Anglo-Indians, Europeans, Dalit. The depressed classes
were assigned a number of seats to be filled by election from special constituencies in which
voters belonging to the depressed classes only could vote.
According to some people, Caste Based Reservation in India started in 2nd Century B.C. where
upper castes enjoyed caste based reservation. [1]
The Award was highly controversial and opposed by Mahatma Gandhi, who fasted in protest
against it. Communal Awardwas supported by many among the minority communities, most
notably revolutionary Dr. B. R. Ambedkar. After lengthy negotiations, Gandhi reached an
agreement with Dr. Ambedkar (Initially opposed it) to have a single Hindu electorate,
withDalits having seats reserved within it. This is called the Poona Pact. Electorates for other
religions like Muslim and Sikhremained separate.
Present reservation system has a long history and has been debated before and after Indian
independence from the British in 1947.
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. In
1882, Hunter Commission was appointed. Jyotirao Phule made a demand of free and
compulsory education for Smrti along with proportionate representation in government jobs.[2] In
1891, there was a demand for reservation of government jobs with an agitation (in the princely
State of Travancore) against the recruitment of non-nativesinto public service overlooking
qualified native people.[2] In 1901,reservations were introduced in Maharashtra (in the Princely
State of Kolhapur) by Shahu Maharaj.[2] Chatrapati Sahuji Maharaj, Maharaja of Kolhapur
in Maharashtra introduced reservation in favour of non-Brahmin and backward classes as early
as 1902. He provided free education to everyone and opened several hostels in Kolhapur to
make it easier for everyone to receive the education. He also made sure everyone got suitable
employment no matter what social class they belonged. He also appealed for a class-free India
and the abolition of untouchability. 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.[3]
In 1909, reservations were introduced in favour of a number of castes and communities that had
little share in the administration by the British.[2] There were many other reforms in favour of and
against reservations before the Indian Independence itself.
Even after the Indian Independence there were some major changes in favour of the STs, SCs
and OBCs. One of the most important occurred in 1979 when the Mandal Commission was
established to assess the situation of the socially and educationally backward classes.[4] The
commission did not have exact figures for a sub-caste, known as the Other Backward
Class(OBC), and used the 1930[5] census data, further classifying 1,257 communities as
backward, to estimate the OBC population at 52%.[5] In 1980 the commission submitted a report,
and recommended changes to the existing quotas, increasing them from 22.5% to 49.5%.[4]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. But it wasn't until the 1990s that the
recommendations of the Mandala Commission were implemented in Government Jobs
by Vishwanath Pratap Singh.[6]
The concept of untouchability was not practised uniformly throughout the country; therefore the
identification of oppressed classes was difficult to carry out. Allegedly, the practice of segregation
and untouchability prevailed more in the northern parts of India as opposed to in Southern India.
Furthermore, certain castes or communities, considered "untouchable" in one province were not
in other provinces.[7]
Category as
per Government of
India
Reservation Percentage
as per Government of
India
15%
Total constitutional
reservation percentage
49.5%
Scheduled
Tribes (ST)
Other
7.5% Backward
Classes (OBC)
27%
general 50.5%
Caste[edit]
In central-government funded higher education institutions, 22.5%[18] of available seats are
reserved for Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) students (7.5% for STs, 15% for
SCs).[18] This reservation percentage has been raised to 49.5%[18] 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 will next rotate in 2026
per the Delimitation Commission).
The exact percentages vary from state to state:
In Tamil Nadu, the reservation is 18%[18] for SCs and 1% for STs, based on local
demographics.
In Northeast India, especially in Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Nagaland and Mizoram,
reservation for ST in State Govt. jobs is 80% with only 20% unreserved. In the Central
Universities of NEHU(shillong) and Rajiv Gandhi University, 60% of seats are reserved for
ST students.
In Andhra Pradesh, 25% of educational institutes and government jobs are reserved for
OBCs, 15% for SCs, 6% for STs and 4% for Muslims.[19]
In West Bengal, 35% of educational institute seats and[20] government jobs are reserved for
SC, ST, and OBC (22% SC, 6%ST,[20] 7% for[20] OBC A &B[21])in West Bengal there is no
reservation on religious basis but some economically and educationally backward Muslim
castes(basis surnames pertaining to different profession e.g. cobbler, weaver etc.) have
been included along with their Hindu counterparts in OBC list namely OBC A and OBC B, in
both lists caste from both communities are there.[22] But in higher educational institute, till now
there is no reservation for the OBC community but there is reservation in regard to admission
in primary,secondary[20] and higher secondary studies.[20][21]
Gender[edit]
In 1993, a constitutional amendment in India called for a random one third of village council
leader, or pradhan, positions in gram panchayat to be reserved for women.[23] The village council
is responsible for the provision of village infrastructure such as public buildings, water, and
roads and for identifying government program beneficiaries. Although all decisions in the
village council are made by majority, the pradhan is the only full-time member and exercises
significant control over the final council decisions.[24]Recent research on the quota system has
revealed that it has changed perceptions of womens abilities, improved womens electoral
chances, and raised aspirations and educational attainment for adolescent girls.[25]
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 not in favour of providing preferential treatment to women to create a
level playing field for all of its citizens.[citation needed]
The Women's Reservation Bill was passed by the Rajya Sabha on 9 March 2010 by a majority
vote of 186 members in favour and 1 against. As of March 2013, the Lok Sabhahas not voted on
the bill. Critics say gender cannot be held as a basis for reservation alone other factors should
also be considered e.g. economic, social conditions of woman candidate especially when
applying reservation for educated women. There also is a growing demand for women
reservation in pre-existing reservations like OBC, SC/ST, Physically handicapped etc. Some
groups still demand that reservation for women should be at least 50% as they comprise 50% of
the population.
In Gujarat, 33% of posts are reserved for females in all government departments and services,
such as police, health, education and general administration.[26][27]
Religion[edit]
There is no reservation granted on the basis of religion in the Central educational institutions at
the national level, although reservation has been extended to religious minorities in some states.
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).[28]
The Government of Andhra Pradesh introduced a law enabling 4% reservations for Muslims in
2004. This law has upheld by the Supreme Court of India in an interim order on March 25,
2010,however it constituted a Constitution bench to look in the issue.Until that decision,it is
allowed.[29][30] The Supreme Court bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justices J.M.
Panchal and B.S. Chauhan referred this issue to Constitution bench to examine the validity of the
impugned Act since it involved important issues of Constitution.[31] The issue of whether religionbased quotas are permissible under the Constitution is now before a Constitution bench of the
Supreme Court. Pending a decision on its legality, the top court, however, allowed the state
government to implement the quota.[32] Kerala Public Service Commission has a quota of 12% for
Muslims. Religious minority (Muslim or Christian) educational institutes also have 50%
reservation for Muslim or Christian religions. The Central government has listed a number
of Muslimcommunities as backward Muslims, making them eligible for reservation.
Controversy[edit]
The Government of India on 22 December 2011 announced establishment of a sub-quota of
4.5% for minorities within the existing 27% reservation for Other Backward Classes. The
reasoning given was that Muslim communities that have been granted OBC status are unable to
compete with Hindu OBC communities.[33] It was alleged that the decision was announced as
the Election Commission announced Assembly elections in five states on 24 December 2011.
The government would not have been able to announce this due to the model code of conduct.
On 12 January 2012, the Election Commission stayed implementation of this decision for
violation of the model code of conduct.[34] Later, Justice Sachar, head of the Sachar
Committee that was commissioned to prepare a report on the latest social, economic and
educational condition of the Muslim community of India, criticised the government decision,
saying "Such promises will not help the backward section of minorities. It is like befooling them.
These people are making tall claims just to win elections". He suggested that instead of
promising to give reservations, the government should focus on basic issues of improving
administration and governance.[35]
On 28 May 2012, the Andhra Pradesh High Court quashed the sub-quota. The court said that the
sub-quota has been carved out only on religious lines and not on any other intelligible basis. The
court criticised the decision: "In fact, we must express our anguish at the rather casual manner in
which the entire issue has been taken up by the central government."[36]
Status as a domicile[edit]
With few exceptions, all jobs under certain State governments are reserved for those who
are domiciled within the jurisdiction of that government. For example, in Punjab Engineering
College (Chandigarh) 85% of seats were earlier reserved for Chandigarh-domicilesnow it is
50%. There are also some seats reserved for the Jammu and Kashmir 'migrants' in every
Government-aided educational institute.
Other[edit]
Some reservations are also made for:
The UGC provided financial assistance only up to the end of the Xth Plan period ending 31
March 2007. The work undertaken by the SC/ST Cells was reviewed at the end of Xth plan. The
Xth plan is proposed to ensure that there is an effective implementation of the reservation policy
in admissions, recruitment, allotment of staff quarters, hostels, etc. Essentially, its goal was to
ensure that the SC/ST Cells were established in the universities.[14]
New rules implementation of UPA Government do not provides Scholarship scheme and
reservation quota of students and Employees of colleges under central University and State
University approved by University Grants Commission (UGCs).
Reservation in promotion[edit]
Background[edit]
The Supreme Court of India, in its 16 November 1992 judgment in the Indra Sawhney
case,[38] ruled that reservations in promotions are unconstitutional, but allowed its continuation for
5 years as a special case.[39] In 1995, 77th amendment to the Constitution was made to insert
clause (4A) to Article 16 before the five-year period expired to continue with reservations for
SC/STs in promotions.[40] Clause (4A) was further modified through the 85th amendment to give
the benefit of consequential seniority to SC/ST candidates promoted by reservation.[41]
The 81st amendment was made to the Constitution that inserted clause (4B) in Article 16 to
permit the government to treat the backlog of reserved vacancies as a separate and distinct
group, to which the limit of 50 percent ceiling on reservation may not apply.[42] The 82nd
amendment inserted a provison in Article 335 to enable states to give concessions to SC/ST
candidates in promotion.[43]
The validity of all the above four amendments i.e. 77th, 81st, 82nd and 85th was challenged in
the Supreme Court through various petitions clubbed together in M Nagaraj & Others vs. Union
of India & Others, mainly on the ground that these altered the Basic Structure of the
Constitution.[44]
On 19 October 2006, the Supreme Court upheld these four amendments but stipulated that the
concerned state will have to show, in each case, the existence of compelling reasons which
include backwardness, inadequacy of representation and overall administrative efficiency, before
making provisions for reservation. The court further held that these provisions are
merely enabling provisions. If a state government wishes to make provisions for reservation to
SC/STs in promotion, the state has to collect quantifiable data showing backwardness of the
class and inadequacy of representation of that class.[44]
reservation in promotions can be provided only if there is sufficient data and evidence to justify
the need.[48]
School Admissions Under RTE : Though Andhra Pradesh Govt says economically backward
children are admitted in to private schools under Right To Education (RTE) Act, but the fact
is children are admitted in to private schools based on caste based reservations. check page
9 and Point no 4 of this below document
The reservation for women cuts across all classes and communities and is a horizontal and not
vertical reservation. As such the total % of reservations has to be counted at 50% only; and that
is in consonance with the Supreme Court dicta that reservations in general ought not to exceed
50% of the posts/seats if the right to equal opportunity to all without discrimination guaranteed
under Article 16 is to be vindicated and respected.[citation needed][49]
Reservations in Maharashtra[edit]
Maharashtra has 52% reservation in educational institutions and government jobs. The
government of Maharashtra added Marathas (16%) and some Muslim subcastes (5%) to the
reservation in 2014 but the move was rejected by Bombay High Court later.[50][51][52][53] If this
reservation to Maratha implemented, it will leave the remaining 23% to General/Open
category.[54][55]
Constitutional posts
Creamy layer
1. Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai and its ten constituent units, namely:
1. Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Trombay
2. Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam
3. Raja Ramanna Centre for Advanced Technology, Indore
4. Institute for Plasma Research, Gandhinagar
5. Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre, Kolkata
6. Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics, Kolkata;
7. Institute of Physics, Bhubaneshwar
8. Institute of Mathematical Sciences, Chennai
9. Harish-Chandra Research Institute, Allahabad
10. Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai
2. Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai
3. North Eastern Indira Gandhi Regional Institute of Health and Medical Sciences, Shillong
4. Physical Research Laboratory, Ahmedabad
5. Space Physics Laboratory, Thiruvananthapuram
6. Indian Institute of Remote Sensing, Dehradun
7. Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University, Katra
On 27 October 2015 the Supreme Court directed the state and the Central governments to end
the regional quota and to ensure that super-speciality medical courses are kept "unreserved,
open and free" from any domicile status after the court had allowed petitions files by some MBBS
doctors.[69]
1959
1965
1974
1984
1995
1.18
1.64
3.2
6.92
10.12
II
2.38
2.82
4.6
10.36 12.67
III
6.95
8.88
10.3
13.98 16.15
IV
20.2
21.26*
excludes sweepers
The above table shows that over time as the new laws for the reservation systems were passed
employment of SC's in Class I, II, III, and IV public sectors increased substantially.
See also[edit]
References[edit]
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23. Jump up^ Chattopadhyay, Raghabendra, and Esther Duflo. 2004. "Women as Policy Makers:
Evidence from a Randomized Policy Experiment in India." Econometrica 72(5): 1409
43.http://www.povertyactionlab.org/evaluation/impact-women-policy-makers-public-goods-india
24. Jump up^ Beaman, Lori, Raghabendra Chattopadhyay, Esther Duflo, Rohini Pande, and Petia
Topalova. 2009. "Powerful Women: Does Exposure Reduce Bias?" The Quarterly Journal of
Economics 124(4): 14971540. http://www.povertyactionlab.org/evaluation/perceptions-femaleleaders-india
25. Jump up^ "Raising Female Leaders" J-PAL Policy Briefcase April
2012.http://www.povertyactionlab.org/publication/raising-female-leaders
26. Jump up^ "33% reservation for women in all Gujarat state government jobs". Deccan Herald. 13
October 2014. Retrieved 3 September 2015.
27. Jump up^ "Gujarat increases women's reservation to 33% in government jobs". dna. 14 October
2014. Retrieved 3 September 2015.
28. Jump up^ Viswanathan, S. (16 November 2007). "A step forward". Frontline 24 (22). Archived
from the original on 20 November 2010.
29. Jump up^ PTI. "Interim relief to AP on Muslim reservation". The Hindu. Retrieved 14 June 2015.
30. Jump up^ "Supreme Court to hear govt on Muslim quota". The Times of India. Retrieved 14
June2015.
31. Jump up^ "Centre seeks SCs approval on Muslim reservation". timesofindia-economictimes.
Retrieved 14 June 2015.
32. Jump up^ "SC backs quota for Muslims in Andhra Pradesh". Retrieved 14 June 2015.
33. Jump up^ "4.5% quota fails to impress Muslims in Uttar Pradesh". The Times of India. 23
December 2011.
34. Jump up^ "Election Commission stalls 4.5% sub-quota in poll states". The Times of India. 12
January 2012. Retrieved 28 May 2012.
35. Jump up^ "Govt trying to befool minorities with quota: Sachar". 19 February 2012. Retrieved20
February 2012.
36. Jump up^ "HC Quashes Centre's 4.5% Sub-Quota for Minorities". 28 May 2012. Retrieved28
May 2012.
37. Jump up^ http://www.rediff.com/news/report/rediff-labs-can-you-guess-how-many-indians-getmerit-based-scholarships/20140901.htm
38. Jump up^ "Indra Sawhney Etc. Etc vs Union Of India And Others, Etc. ... on 16 November,
1992". Retrieved 14 June 2015.
39. Jump up^ "Indra Sawhney Etc. vs Union of India And Others, Etc. on 16 November, 1992".
IndianKanoon.org. Retrieved 22 August 2012. (4) Reservation being extreme form of protective
measure or affirmative action it should be confined to minority of seats. Even though the
Constitution does not lay down any specific bar but the constitutional philosophy being against
proportional equality the principle of balancing equality ordains reservation, of any manner, not to
exceed 50%." ,"Reservation in promotion is constitutionally impermissible as, once the
advantaged and disadvantaged are made equal and are brought in one class or group then any
further benefit extended for promotion on the inequality existing prior to be brought in the group
would be treating equals unequally. It would not be eradicating the effects of past discrimination
but perpetuating it.
40. Jump up^ "Seventy Seventh Amendment". Indiacode.nic.in. Retrieved 19 November 2011.
41. Jump up^ "Eighty Fifth Amendment". Indiacode.nic.in. 4 January 2002. Retrieved 19
November2011.
42. Jump up^ "Eighty First Amendment". Indiacode.nic.in. 29 August 1997. Retrieved 19
November2011.
43. Jump up^ "Eighty Second Amendment". Indiacode.nic.in. Retrieved 19 November 2011.
44. ^ Jump up to:a b Justice S.H.Kapadia. "M.Nagaraj & Others vs Union of India & Others on 19
October, 2006". Retrieved 22 August 2012. We reiterate that the ceiling-limit of 50%, the concept
of creamy layer and the compelling reasons, namely, backwardness, inadequacy of
representation and overall administrative efficiency are all constitutional requirements without
which the structure of equality of opportunity in Article 16 would collapse.", "As stated above, the
impugned provision is an enabling provision. The State is not bound to make reservation for
SC/ST in matter of promotions.
45. Jump up^ "Promotion quota not legally sustainable: HC". The Times of India. 5 January 2011.
Retrieved 10 August 2012.
46. Jump up^ "Supreme Court upholds High court's decision to quash quota in promotion". The
Times of India. 28 April 2012. Retrieved 10 August 2012.
47. Jump up^ "SC quashes quota benefits in promotions". The Hindu. 28 April 2012. Retrieved10
August 2012.
48. Jump up^ "U.P.Power Corp.Ltd. vs Rajesh Kumar & Ors. on 27 April 2012". IndianKanoon.org.
Archived from the original on 10 August 2012. Retrieved 10 August 2012.
49. Jump up^ wew
50. Jump up^ Omar Rashid. "Maharashtra scraps Muslim quota". The Hindu. Retrieved 14
June2015.
51. Jump up^ "Devendra Fadnavis government scraps quota for Muslims in education". The Indian
Express. 5 March 2015. Retrieved 14 June 2015.
52. Jump up^ "Govt will appeal on Maratha quota in SC next week". The Indian Express. 26
November 2014. Retrieved 3 September 2015.
53. Jump up^ "Why supreme court is right in denying unethical pleasure to Maharashtra govt Governance Now". Governance Now. 18 December 2014. Retrieved 3 September 2015.
54. Jump up^ "Jobs, education quota for Marathas, Muslims cleared". Retrieved 26 June 2014.
55. Jump up^ "Maharashtra govt clears reservation for Marathas, Muslims". Retrieved 26 June 2014.
56. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f "Judgement Writ Petition (Civil) No.930 of 1990 Indira Sawhney Versus
Union of India And others (16.11.1992)" (PDF). National Commission for Backward Classes.
Retrieved 5 November 2011.
57. Jump up^ Office Memorandum, ncbc.nic.in, pp. 78
58. Jump up^ "Supreme Court Of India JUDGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM".
59. Jump up^ "SCOURGE OF RESERVATION: THE INVISIBLE CREAMY LAYER".
60. Jump up^ "Explained: Order reserved".
61. Jump up^ http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/building-a-just-society/
62. Jump up^ "Plea to reconsider judgment in Indra Sawhney case of 1992".
63. Jump up^ "Raise creamy layer to Rs 10.5 lakh: OBC panel".
64. Jump up^ "OBC panel backs off, won't make creamy layer reservation criteria stringent".
65. Jump up^ "OBC sub-division, relaxing creamy layer is a must: NCBC tells govt".
66. Jump up^ http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Raise-creamy-layer-to-Rs-10-5-lakh-OBCpanel/articleshow/47155884.cms
67. Jump up^ "Press Information Bureau English Releases". Retrieved 2 February 2015.
68. Jump up^ http://india.gov.in/allimpfrms/allacts/3335.pdf
69. Jump up^ "No quota in higher medicine: SC". The Telegraph. 27 October 2015.
70. ^ Jump up to:a b "Chapter 3- An Assessment of Reservations (Pg 32)" (PDF). News. Dalit Bahujan
Media. Retrieved 17 November 2011.
s And Against Judicial Populism" by Arun Shourie, Publisher: Harper Collins India