The Supreme Court last week recognised what can only be called the principle of reservations within reservations. And this must be welcome. For it would go a long way in correcting the pronounced imbalance in the distribution of gains of the SC/ST reservations. Without doubt, certain castes among the reserved groups had benefited disproportionately more at the cost of others. For the reservations pie is limited and cannot accommodate everyone at one go. Correcting the tilt in favour of one sub-caste to provide a chance to the hitherto ignored sub-castes would require a detailed study. How this is to be done would now be the task of state governments and the Centre as well. But there should be no longer any doubt that the gains of reservations amongst the underprivileged sections since the founding of the Republic have been most haphazardly distributed. Remarkably, it was the Supreme Court which in a 2004 judgement had prevented sub-classification of the SCs/STs, virtually deeming them to be a homogenous group. Last Thursday’s 6:1 majority order nixes the principle of homogeneity, allowing for sub-categorisation of groups according to their levels of social and economic development under the reservation law. Several states, notably Tamil Nadu, Punjab and Telangana, were earlier barred from what actually would boil down to quotas within quotas. For instance, there is little doubt that Jatavs in Uttar Pradesh have cornered most of the gains of reservations, leaving little for others in the Scheduled Caste category in the State. As a result, Balmikis have not only come to resent the dominance of the Jatavs, but they now virtually carve their own separate path politically and socially. Likewise, in Rajasthan the benefits of reservations have majorly gone to the Meenas while other tribes have felt deprived of the benefits. Or take the case of the Madigas in Telangana who have been agitating for sub-quotas in reservations for a long time, with the prime minister himself promising to undo the injustice suffered in spite of the reservations. Justice B R Gavai, himself a Dalit, who wrote the majority opinion has recommended that a policy be framed to identify the creamy layer in the SCs and STs in order to exclude them from the benefit of affirmative action. He tellingly argued as to why the son of a Scheduled Caste IAS or IPS officer studying in the best school or college in the country under the reserved category be given preference over the son of a peon or a cobbler studying in a village school. Equating the son of an IAS or IPS officer whose father has got through the reserved quota with the son of an illiterate sweeper would be an atrocity itself against the very spirit behind the reservation law. As Justice Gavai noted, children of SC category officers have advantages denied to children of the poor SCs studying in village schools. Who can question that logic? One generation having been uplifted socially and economically out of poverty must make way for the other far more disadvantaged whom they had left behind. In other words, those who have made it through reservations must make way for others less fortunate. After all, even in the reserved categories the opportunities are not infinite while the demand far outstrips the supply.
Of course, it will not be easy for any government to pinpoint the creamy layer among the reserved categories in order to exclude it from the benefit of reservations. Governments will come under intense pressure from all sides, making the task all the more difficult. To make the exercise fair and impartial, and for it to appear to be fair and impartial, states may have to set up judicial commissions under former High Court judges to evolve a clear-cut criterion for inclusion and exclusion in the reserved category. As it is, the principle of creamy layer for the OBC reservations has not been implemented properly. Income criteria for exclusion too has posed problems, with some sections demanding a higher income cap for denial of reservations benefits. No less problematic is the issue of extending the quota net over and above the prescribed 50% cap imposed by the apex court. Some states, notably Bihar, have challenged the ceiling, seeking to extend the reservations in government jobs and educational institutions to up to 65%. The apex court is yet to list the matter for hearing, but we can anticipate howls of protests from the merit-wallahs should there be any move to further enlarge the reservations pie. Also, Rahul Gandhi, who has demanded a country-wide caste census with an eye on unsettling the BJP’s unifying Hindutva plank, could draw consolation from the SC order recommending a survey of the SCs/STs for identifying its creamy layer. Meanwhile, it speaks poorly of our state of socio-economic development that 75 years after Independence the national polity should still be embroiled in the debate over the intricacies of caste- and community-based reservations. Social and economic equality as a national project seems to have faltered badly.
