RESERVATION POLICY

Reservation

• Reservation is a social measure carried to secure rights, powers and privileges for the deserving people.
• It is a form of Social Justice.
• The Indian Constitution provides ample opportunities for reservation.
• Currently, reservation of 15%, 7.5% and 27% seats are provided for candidates originating from the SC, ST and OBC communities at Central level in case of direct recruitment on all-India basis by open competition.
• In case of direct recruitment on all-India basis otherwise than by open competition, the percentage fixed is 16.66 per cent, 7.5 per cent and 25.84 per cent, respectively.
• Tamil Nadu was one among the pioneer States which implemented social welfare measures like reservation, for the weaker sections.

In constitution

• The Indian Constitutional Articles 15(4), 16(4) and 46 give room for making any special provision for the advancement of SEBC or SCs and STs.

Non-Brahmin Manifesto

• In 1913, three Muslim Leagues and the South Indian League gave petition to the then Viceroy of the Madras Presidency against the domination of a particular caste in Government jobs.
• The Justice Party significantly worked to elevate the status of Non-Brahmin Backward Hindus.
• The first expression in Madras to the demand for greater participation by the under privileged sections of the society was given in the manifesto issued in 1916 by a small body of elites.
• This manifesto which came to be known as the Non-Brahmin Manifesto of 1916 was designed to secure the advancement of Non-Brahmins in the face of the so-called Brahmin monopoly in education, and in the professional and Government services.
• It tried for communal representation when it formed the Ministry in 1920.

Resolution of 1921

• In August 1921, a resolution was passed in the State Legislative Council recommending the Government to take steps to increase the proportion of posts in Government offices held by the Non-Brahmin Community.
• The appointments were divided into proper order like Brahmins, Non-Brahmins, Indian Christians, Muslims, Europeans and Anglo-Indians and others.
• It was accepted by the Board of Revenue.
• The resolution was accepted by the Government.
• The first communal G.O was introduced in the year 1921.

 Communal G.O

• Another communal G.O. was introduced in 1922 which enhanced the opportunities of appointments of the Non-Brahmins.
• In the meantime, the Government passed a G.O. in the year 1925 through which the Government published two lists announcing the Depressed Classes and castes other than the Depressed Classes.
• This was the first order, making the converts from the Depressed Classes eligible for the grant of half fee concession under the Rule 92. This helped the Adi-Dravidas also to gain in the field of education.
• The year 1927 was another milestone for passing the third communal G.O., which also enabled the Non-Brahmins to have their share.
• The communities were grouped into five categories; but the proportion of appointments to be given to each group was revised in the following order.
  • Non-Brahmin Hindus, five out of twelve (5/12),
  • Brahmins – two out of twelve (2/12),
  • Muslims – two out of twelve (2/12),
  • Anglo Indians and Christians - two out of twelve (2/12)
  • Scheduled Castes - one out of twelve (1/12).
• This position continued up to 1947.

1928

• The following classifications established by the Mumbai state Government:
  • Depressed Classes
  • Original and Hill Tribe
  • Other Backward Class.

1931

• Separate election Camps were declared for backward classes.
• Gandhi’s till death hunger strike (Poona, Sept. 24, 1932).
• Finally, the agreement between Leaders of Caste-Hindus and of Dalits was agreed upon and is well known as Poona Pact.
• As Rettamalai Srinivasan was a member of the Madras Legislative Council, he got the chance to go to London to take part in Round Table Conferences.
• The British Government nominated him and B.R. Ambedkar as the representative of the minorities and SCs of India.
• According to the Act of 1935, the Madras Presidency consisted of bi-cameral legislatures, namely Legislative Assembly and Legislative Council.
• The Legislative Assembly consisted of 215 members. The membership was granted on the basis of communal representation.
• Among 146 general constituencies 30 seats were reserved for the SCs.

1943

• According to a memorandum submitted to the viceroy by Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, 8.33% of reservation in services in favour of the Scheduled Castes became effective.

1944

• The Indian Education Department have announced scholarship for Scheduled Castes.

1946

• Reservation for Scheduled castes was increased from 8.33% to 12.33% at Central Level.

1946-48

• Reservation for Schedule Castes was expanded to 16.66% at Central Level.

Champakam Dorairajan Case 1951

• State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India.
• This judgement led to the First Amendment of the Constitution of India.
• It was the first major judgement regarding reservations in Republic of India. In its ruling the Supreme Court upheld the Madras High Court judgement, which in turn had struck down the Government Order (G.O) passed in 1927 in the Madras Presidency.
• The Supreme Court's verdict held that providing such reservations was in violation of Article 16 (2) of the Indian Constitution.

First amendment 1951

• The champakam dorairajan case judgement necessitated the Constitutional First Amendment, which added Clause (4) to Article 15 in 1951.

• Article 15 (4) - Nothing in this article or in clause (2) of Article 29 shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes.

Shankari Prasad vs Union of India (1951)

• The First Constitutional Amendment was challenged before the Supreme Court in Shankari Prasad v. Union of India with the main issue whether the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951 passed by the provisional Parliament is valid.
• The supreme court upheld the validity of the First Amendment and also held that Article 368 empowers the Parliament to amend the Constitution.

1953 – First Backward Commission

• The first Backward Classes Commission was appointed under the chairmanship of Kaka Kalelkar under Article 340 by the Central Government.
• The commission took two years to study the problems of the Backward Classes and submitted its report in 1955.
• It identified the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (here after cited as SEBCs).
• The Central Government asked the State Governments to decide on the SEBCs.

 Recommendations

• The most interesting thing was that the Backward Classes Commission recommended land reforms, reorganisation of village economy, Boothan movement, development of rural and cottage industries, rural housing, public health and rural water supply, adult literacy, university education and representation of BCs in Government Services.
• The census report of 1961 was based on caste and had considered women as belonging to the Backward Class.
• Further it recommended 70 per cent of reservation in all the technical and the professional institution for the BCs.

1979 Mandal commission

• The Mandal Commission, or the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Commission was established in India on 1 January 1979 by the Janata Party government under Prime Minister Morarji Desai, with a mandate to "identify the socially or educationally backward classes" of India.
• In 1980, based on its rationale that OBCs ("Other backward classes"), identified on the basis of caste, economic and social indicators, comprised 52% of India's population.

• The Other Backward Classes, as identified by the Mandal Commission, make up about 52% of India’s population according to the 1931 Census, the last enumeration of castes in the country.
• The Commission's report recommended that members of Other Backward Classes (OBC) be granted reservations to 27% of jobs under the Central government and public sector undertakings, thus making the total number of reservations for SC, ST and OBC to 49%.
• Though the report had been completed in 1983, the V.P. Singh government declared its intent to implement the report in 13^th August 1990.

1982

• In 1982, it was specified that 15 percent and 7.5 percent of vacancies in public sectorand government-aided educational institutes should be reserved for the SC and ST candidates, respectively.

1991

• In 1991, the Congress government headed by the Narasimha Rao was the first time ever a government came with the idea to grant reservation to those belonging to upper caste but are economically weaker.

1992

• It is also known as Indira Sawhney Case consisted of 9 judge benches.
• Supreme Court, in Mandal Judgement, reiterated that Reservation percentage cannot exceed 50% and "Creamy Layer" to be excluded from Reservation benefits.
• Backward Classes of the Citizens of in Article 16(4) can be identified only on the basis of caste and not on the economic basis.
• Article 16(4) is not an exception to Article 16(1).

• The backward classes in Article 16(4) are not similar to as socially backward classes in Article 15(4) i.e. SC and ST.
• Creamy layer can be and must be eliminated from the Backward Classes.
• The creamy layer criteria were introduced at Rs 1 lakh in 1993 and revised to Rs 2.5 lakh in 2004, Rs 4.5 lakh in 2008 and Rs 6 lakh in 2013, but now the ceiling has been raised to Rs 8 lakh (in September 2017).
• Article 16(4) permits the classification of backwards classes into more backward classes.
• Reservation shall not exceed 50%.
• The 50% ceiling meant the Other Backward Classes received 27% share in the reservation pie while Dalits and Adivasis together got 22.5%, bring the total to 49.5%.
• The court said that this rule should be applied every year.
• However, it may be relaxed in favour of people from far flung and remote areas because of their peculiar conditions. However, extreme caution should be exercised in doing so.
• Carry forward rule is valid but it is subject to 50%.
• There should be No reservation in the Promotions but allowed its continuation for five years.

P.A. Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra

• The Supreme Court abolished state quotas in private unaided professional colleges and specifically held that the state could not impose reservations in unaided institutions.
• This led to the passing of the Constitution (Ninety-third Amendment) Act, 2005 by the Parliament in December, 2005.

93^rd Amendment Act

• In April 2006, the government decided to reserve nearly 27% of seats for students from the OBC segment in institutes of higher learning in India.
• The Constitutional 93rd amendment, 2006 added clause (5) in Article 15 which stated-nothing shall prevent the State from making any special provision, by law, for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes.

Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India

• It is an Indian public interest litigation case challenging the conclusion of the Mandal Commission that about 52% of the total population of India belonged to Other Backward Classes classification.
• The Constitution (Ninety-Third Amendment) Act, 2005 does not violate the "basic structure" of the Constitution so far as it relates to the state-maintained institutions and aided educational institutions.
• Creamy layer principle is one of the parameters to identify backward classes.
• Therefore, principally, the "Creamy layer" principle cannot be applied to STs and SCs, as SCs and STs are separate classes by themselves.

Nagaraj case 2006

• In 1995, the 77th amendment to the Constitution was made to amend Article 16 before the five-year period expired to continue with reservations for SC/STs in promotions.
• It was further modified through the 85th amendment to give the benefit of consequential seniority to SC/ST candidates promoted by reservation.

• The 81st amendment was made to the Constitution to permit the government to treat the backlog of reserved vacancies as a separate and distinct group, to which the ceiling of 50 per cent did not apply.
• The 82nd amendment inserted a provision in Article 335 to enable states to give concessions to SC/ST candidates in promotion allowing
  • “Relaxation in qualifying marks in any examination or
  • Lowering the standards of evaluation,
  • For reservation in matters of promotion to any class or classes of services or posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or a State
• The court upheld the constitutional validity of the 77th, 81st, 82nd, and 85th Amendments.
• It, however, ruled that if the state wished to exercise their discretion and make a provision for reservation in promotions for SCs/STs, the State has to collect quantifiable data showing backwardness of the class and inadequacy of representation of that class.
• In other words, the Supreme Court upheld the 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.

April 2008

• On 10 April 2008, the Supreme Court of India upheld the law that provides for 27% reservation for Other Backward Castes (OBCs) in educational institutions supported by the Central government, while ruling that the creamy layer among the OBCs should be excluded from the quota.

September 2018

• It was filed to solve the issues in the reservations for SC/ST in promotions.
• The unanimous judgement was pronounced by a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra.
• The Supreme Court paved the way for grant of quota for promotions in the government jobs to SCs and STs.
• The apex court reversed the finding in Nagaraj judgment.
• The 2018 Verdict stated that states are not required to collect quantifiable data to prove backwardness, saying it was contrary to the decision in Indira Sawhney case.
• Additionally, the state was also required to ensure that the reservation does not breach the 50 per cent ceiling.
• The verdict had also said that the creamy layer concept cannot be applied to the SCs and STs for promotions in government jobs.

In Tamil Nadu

• The Congress Government was in power between the year 1947 and 1967.
• It took various social measures for the upliftment of the socially affected.
• During 1946-47, T.Prakasam, Chief Minister of Madras Presidency opposed the Communal G.O. of 1947 on the grounds of efficiency and intelligence and he issued a G.O. to reserve twenty percent of seats in the educational institutions and Government jobs for “Open Competition”.

1951

• 16% Reservation for SC/ST and 25% Reservation for OBCs introduced by P. S. Kumaraswamy Raja.
• Total Reservation stood at 41%.

1971

• Sattanathan Committee was formed in 1971 by the then DMK Government to study the position of the Backward Classes.
• It recommended the introduction of "Creamy Layer" and altering Reservation percentage for Backward Classes to 16% and separate reservation of 17% to Most Backward Classes (MBCs).
• DMK Government increased OBC reservation to 31% and Reservation for SC/ST has been increased to 18%.
• Total Reservation stood at 49%.

1980

• ADMK government under MGR excludes "Creamy Layer" from OBC reservation benefits.
• Income Limit for availing Reservation benefit has been fixed at Rs 9000 Per Annum.
• DMK and other Opposition parties protested the decision.
• Later Creamy Layer scheme was withdrawn and Reservation % for OBC has been increased to 50%.
• Total Reservation Stood at 68%.

1989

• Statewide Road Blockade Agitations were launched by Vanniar Sangam demanding 20% reservations in State Government and 2% Reservations in Central Government exclusively for Vanniyar Caste.
• DMK Government Split OBC reservations as 2 Parts with 30% for OBC and 20% for MBC.
• Separate Reservation of 1% introduced for Scheduled Tribes.
• Total Reservation percentage stood at 69%.

1994

• Supreme Court instructed Tamil Nadu Government to follow 50% reservations in the case filed by famous lawyer K. M. Vijayan on behalf of VOICE Consumer forum.
• Anandakrishnan, one of the members of Oversight committee, and then Anna University Vice-Chancellor announced that 50% reservation will be followed.
• The state’s Assembly passed the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Seats in Educational Institutions and Appointments or Posts in the Services under the State) Act, 1993 under Article 31-C to keep its reservation limit intact at 69%.
• Due to initiative taken by the then Jayalalitha Government, 69% Reservation was included in 9th Schedule (76th Amendment Act) by Parliament in 1994.

2007

• IR Coelho vs State of Tamil Nadu called into question the constitutional validity of IX schedule of Indian Constitution.
• IX schedule provided exceptions to legislations placed in it from Judicial review.
• Supreme Court held that the laws placed under IX schedule after Kesavananda Bharati judgment (24th April 1973) cannot be exempt from Judicial review.
• The Bench held that all such laws included in the Ninth Schedule after April 24, 1973 would be tested individually on the touchstone of violation of fundamental rights or the basic structure doctrine.
• The laws would be examined separately by a three-judge Bench and if these were found to violate the fundamental rights, abridge or abrogate any of the rights or protection granted to the people would be set aside.
• The validity of such laws can be challenged on the touchstone of basic structure such as reflected in Article 21 read with Article 14 and Article 19, Article 15 and the principles underlying these Articles.

Religion

• 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.
• In 2007, The Tamil Nadu government has allotted 3.5% of seats each to Muslims and Christians, thereby altering the OBC reservation to 25% from 30% (since it excludes persons belonging to Other Backward Castes who are either Muslims or Christians).

2009

• In 2009, the Tamilandu Government headed by Karunanaidhi allotted a separate quota of 3 percent for Arunthathiyars within the 18 percent quota of Scheduled Castes.

Facts

• Chief Minister K Palaniswami has issued orders that four percent reservation, from the existing three percent, would be applicable for differently-abled persons as per the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

Recent developments

Constitution (103rd Amendment) Act, 2019

• The Constitution (103rd Amendment) Act 2019, or 124th Constitutional Amendment bill, the Act providing 10 percent reservation in government jobs and educational institutions to Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) of General Category, came into effect on January 14, 2019.
• It inserted new clauses such as Articles 15 (6) and 16 (6).
• An explanation states that "economic weakness" shall be decided on the basis of "family income" and other "indicators of economic disadvantage.

Above 50 percent rule

• Tamil Nadu leads the reservation race in the country, as it provides 69% reservation in government jobs and in higher education.
• In November 2018, Maharashtra became the second highest state to provide reservation to the tune of 68 percent.
• The state, which already had 52 percent reservation in government jobs and education, had in 2018 added another 16 percent for Marathas.

Proposals

• Haryana in 2016 proposed to increase the reservation up to 67 percent including 10 percent for jats.
• Rajasthan also proposed in 2017 to increase the reservations up to 54 percent including 5 percent for Gujjars.
• Currently, Rajasthan reserves 49 per cent of seats in educational institutes: 16 per cent for Dalits, 12 per cent for Adivasis, and 21 per cent for OBCs.
• Rajasthan is followed by Telangana (2017) and Andhra Pradesh (2017), each of which has proposed laws that are meant to provide 62 and 55 percent reservations respectively.
• Gujarat also proposed to increase the reservation above the 50 percent ceiling by providing reservation to Patidars community.
• In total, there are seven states that have passed laws on reservation above 50 percent (though most of these are not enforced, pending decisions in the higher judiciary).

- - - - - - - - - -