10% quota for poor in general category: Rao failed, will Modi succeed?

Govt will have to amend the Constitution to bypass SC order

All previous attempts at carving out a quota in jobs and education for the economically backward in the ‘general’ category, including the Hindu upper castes, have failed to pass legal muster. The most famous case was when the P V Narasimha (pictured right) Rao government proposed a 10 per cent reservation for such sections in September 1991.

In its Mandal judgment in 1992, the Supreme Court upheld the V P Singh government’s order — based on the recommendations of the Bindheshwari Prasad Mandal-headed commission — of 1990 to provide 27 per cent reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) on social and educational backwardness.

However, the same Supreme Court judgment had struck down the paragraph added by the then Rao government to provide 10 per cent reservation for “other economically backward sections of the people not covered by any of the existing schemes of reservation” as constitutionally invalid.

The SC concluded the Constitution, under its Article 16 (4), does not envisage reservation based merely on economic or educational backwardness, if it is not the result of social backwardness.

According to the Modi government strategists, it hopes to overcome this obstacle by amending the Constitution. It plans to include criteria of economic backwardness by amending Articles 15 and 16. The criteria of backwardness proposed include household income of less than Rs 800,000, ownership of agriculture land of less than five acres, etc.

The other obstacle the current government has to overcome is the cap on reservations at 50 per cent by the SC. Currently, the reservations cumulatively account for 49.5 per cent — 15 per cent for Scheduled Castes (SCs), 7.5 per cent for Scheduled Tribes (STs), and 27 per cent for OBCs. An additional 10 per cent reservation over and above these would violate the SC cap.

While calling it an election gimmick, nearly all political parties have said they would support the Bill. This has to do with the fact that nearly all political parties have had to reach out to the Hindu upper castes at some time to expand their respective support bases.

For example, the Mayawati-led Bahujan Samaj Party has repeatedly proposed in its various election manifestos, at least since 2007, that it supports 10 per cent quota for the poor among the ‘general category’, particularly the Hindu upper castes.

A Constitution Amendment Bill needs to be passed by at least two-thirds of the MPs of each House present and voting, and majority of state legislatures. 

However, the SC, in previous instances of state governments pushing for carving out separate quotas over and above 49.5 per cent, has asked for empirical evidence as proof of the social and educational backwardness of the said communities.

The Modi government’s proposal could also lead to misgivings within the SCs, STs and OBCs that it is somehow ending caste-based reservations. Opposition parties have also asked questions on why the government has failed to fill over two million vacancies in the central government jobs.

As the Rashtriya Janata Dal leader Tejashwi Yadav noted, “Reservation is not to improve financial conditions. It was for socially backward people. If financial condition was to be improved, PM Modi should have given Rs 15 lakh, and created jobs.”

A CONTENTIOUS ISSUE
 

• SC in 1992 Mandal judgment struck down Rao govt’s move to provide 10% quota for poor in ‘general’ category
• SC said Article 16 (4) does not envisage quota merely on economic/educational backwardness
• SC has repeatedly asked for empirical evidence of social backwardness of the communities sought to be given reservation
• Modi govt to overcome this by amending Constitution