Rationalised Reservation

75 years after independence, India, as a country is poised to become a 5-trillion dollar economy in the next decade or so. A feat praiseworthy without a doubt but marred with contradictions stark. One such contradiction being the social stratification based on caste and the ramifications it brings forth. History appears to be a testament to the fact that some sections of our society, by virtue of being born into a particular caste or tribe, have been subjected to atrocities of unimaginable nature at the hands of the so perceived upper caste people. To claim that India today is discrimination free would tantamount to running too far ahead of ourselves. While independence from the British meant some light at the end of the tunnel in terms of the upliftment of the indigent and marginalised, let’s use this space to analyse the impact of some affirmative actions having outlived their utility in our opinion.

Reservation, a tool for bringing the marginalized into the frontline of society, enables the less privileged to grab the opportunities of life. Without positive interventions by the governments, these communities would find it impossible to make it into the mainstream. In India, the constitution itself provides for reservations in public employment, education, electoral democracy, etc.

Although largely based on caste, the reservation is also given based on domicile, gender, age, disability, and even religion. The core of reservation is social mobility in a highly stratified Indian society. The linkage between caste and life chances, and caste and human dignity is well established in India. Granted it is not a poverty alleviation program in the economic sense but is one in a socio-political sense.

That being said has reservation actually been able to achieve its desired purpose, if yes, to what extent? What was deemed necessary for 10 years initially continues to exist even after 70. Rather than a means of upliftment it has become an end in itself. Communities and castes fight with each other and the establishment in order to get listed for a special quota. Instead of trying to come out of it, people are striving to further deepen the lines of social demarcation. Castes and tribes are something permanently associated with an individual. You are assigned one at the time of birth just like your gender only that these days you may chose to identify as a different gender later in life but dare not choose your caste. Because if you do that puts an end to the benefits you receive under that caste/tribe.

A classic example here would be of the entrance examination to a premier medical institute of the country to which thousands of medical aspirants apply from across the country each year. The intake capacity being limited, not everyone can get the admission therefore a screening process filters out meritorious candidates based on their performance. However half the seats are reserved for the SC/ST/OBC candidates. Aimed at creating a level playing field for all and understandably so, the erstwhile disadvantaged get a crack at a visibly better future. 5 years later when a batch of medical students graduate, all with the same standard of education, training and facilities, there comes a time for admissions to post-graduate courses. The process of allotting seats based on the categories one belongs to continues. Despite scoring less in the entrance exam some doctors get their preferred stream for specialization while others don’t even figure in the list and have to drop a year by virtue of being born into a particular caste or tribe. This happens even after scoring more than their batch-mates who they shared their graduate classrooms with. The treatment is the same for  govt. Job placements and  even in promotions. One very interesting observation here is that factually reservations come in handy when a candidate scores less than the cut-off for general category which means less expertise of the subject (if at all entrance exams reveal that) and therefore countless human lives jeopardised.

In a similar vein selecting a civil engineer with less marks than others in the recruitment test and the same engineer constructs a bridge or a flyover in a city, if tomorrow the same project turns out to be faulty and a handful of people lose their lives, who do we blame then. Because the standards of qualification have been lowered for the” reserved”, some may conclude that they lack the required knowledge and skill needed for the performance of the job and letting efficient administration go for a toss.

The Supreme Court of India has consistently referred to the notions of “efficiency” and “merit” while adjudicating the validity of various reservation policies. For instance, the Supreme Court has held in several judgments, including M Nagraj 2006 and Jarnail Singh 2018 that the reservation policies made under various provisions of Article 16 of the Constitution would be limited by Article 335.

Another argument is that even if the reservation is provided, the open category must be filled by persons from the “General Category” only to accommodate merit to the extent possible. While politicians like us are quick to jump onto the bandwagon and manifest knee-jerk reactions vis-a-vis reservation policies, we promise the heavens and the earth to the people without actually delving deeper into the issue on empirical and rational grounds.

To common sense it is a no brainer that touching the issue of reservation for political parties in power is akin to touching a live wire, therefore time and again the judiciary in this country has had to step in and rationalise the same to whatever extent possible. One such instance being the Supreme Court of India defining the "creamy layer", quoting an Indian governmental office memorandum dated 8 September 1993. The term was originally introduced in the context of reservation of jobs for certain groups in Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India case in 1992. As the concept of creamy layer seemed to be a step in the right direction however the institutions, we feel, fell short of making it all inclusive and equitable. Limiting the creamy layer concept to just OBCs and not other categories creates ambiguous standards of preferential treatment to SCs/STs. In addition, not including the income parameters in creamy layer also seems to be arbitrary example being an individual drawing a 1 crore per annum package but still eligible for OBC benefits at the cost of a menial labourer barely meeting ends but from general category.

One may argue that progressive reservations are good in terms of social mobility for instance Norway reserves 40% positions for women in public representation, Japan reserves employment opportunities for aboriginals, Canada has reservations for its natives and so on but making reservations and quota a static entity is divisive and counterproductive.

A balanced way forward would be to cap the reserved seats at 50% and leave an equal room for merit to prevail without undermining the efficiency of administration. The concept of limiting the use of category certificates only up to an extent of gaining public employment or education at premier educational institutes of the country. This would ensure emancipation of the discriminated as well as providing a level playing field for all. Cases where a candidate gets admitted to an IIT for engineering goes on to do an MBA from an IIM and eventually ends up as an IAS officer all because of a reserved category status should be done away with. What’s more deplorable is when the same officer uses category for promotions in services. At the same time the concept of creamy layer should be made applicable to all categories without discrimination. This not only requires a political will but also courage of the highest order. Subsequently we might as well introduce sub-categorization in the reservation system where every community, based on their backwardness, is able to take the benefits of the reservation system. Reminds us of Justice Rohini Commission set up to sub-categorize OBCs. Although most of what has been said above suggests a top-down approach to rationalize the reservation policy, would it be wishful thinking on our part to imagine the beneficiaries of these reservations giving them up on their own. The way we experimented with the idea of LPG subsidies being given up by consumers which turned out to be successful to an extent what is stopping us from replicating a similar initiative in our reservation policy. The statement would not only be powerful but also a beacon light for future policy decisions.

Tafazul Mushtaq is a civil services aspirant.