Click to play videoThe UPA Government's ambitious plans to extend 27 per cent reservations to OBCs in India's premier educational institutions received a set back on Thursday with the Supreme Court (SC) putting on hold what was perceived as a populist scheme.
SC stated the 1931 census was not enough to determine who constitute OBCs in the country and asked the Government to collect fresh data and submit it in court. Till then, a final decision on implementation of quotas will stay pending.
The Government on the other hand said that it would do whatever required Constitutionally and legally to ensure that the law is valid.
A debate on quotas has been fuelled by the Supreme Court stay , with public opinion split down the middle.
CNN-IBN discussed the big question on India 360: Is it time for a referendum on reservations in India? On the discussion panel were Former NCERT Director, Professor J S Rajput -- who spoke against reservations -- and pro-quota activist Professor Sushil Khanna of IIM Kolkata.
"Ambedkar talked about three principles fraternity, liberty and equality. He said liberty without equality lead to stagnation of backwardness and equality without liberty will lead to disenchantment of the achievers. And that’s what is happening today. So though reservation is a necessity we have to work on the modality.” |
The show began with a majority of viewers rooting for a referendum on reservations in India.
Social correction
The argument was begun on a pro-reservation note, with those in favour of quota suggesting that it was not just the prerogative, but also the duty of the Government to bring about social correction, especially at a time when historical injustice against a certain class was beecoming apparent.
Professor Sushil Khanna said that he strongly supported the Government's argument, that the country needed reservation to empower OBCs. He added that the current quota for OBCs was far below their ratio in the population.
He also said that in his opinion, the Government's case had not been argued well in court.
"There is recent data in the National Sample Survey which shows that 37 per cent belongs to OBCs. This can be easily used to form the basis of reservations," he stated.
Taking an anti-quota stand, Professor J S Rajput said that though he did not dispute the fact that people need positive support, but that this support should not be on the basis of religion and caste.
"Reservations have to be on the basis of factors like economic status and any reservation at this stage must come only after there is a national consensus. People should be allowed to review what has been done and what has been achieved,” said Prof Rajput.
Direct from JNU
Delhi's Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) has a decade-old admissions policy which gives extra points to OBCs, women and regional backwardness over and above a candidate's entrance examination score. This has significantly raised JNU's OBC intake.
JNU from past experience is a place where there are lots of issues debated and there is room for every sort of opinion and the reservation issue has been one of the most debated topics of late -- especially last year when protests gripped the nation.
Word from the JNU pro-quota lobby
- Pro-reservationists feel that the Supreme Court judgment has been very regressive, in tune with whatever has been done in the past. They say that the ruling was anti-poor, especially since OBCs comprise a very big chunk of poor people in India.
- Pro-reservationists in JNU are organising a protest rally against the Supreme Court's ruling.
Word from the JNU anti-quota lobby
- They do not agree about a referendum on reservations because if they would do that, then they would also have to agree to the BJP’s demand for referendum on the Ram Mandir issue. They say that they must not go against the democratic process for our own interests and that this was something both V P Singh and Arjun Singh needed to understand.
- They welcomed the SC ruling saying it was a fabulous decision for the student community. However, they said that if the quota was implemented somewhere in the near future, then there should be a population consensus on the same.
"Merit should be the only criteria for selections in job appointment. If reservation policy is doing greatest decision to the country our international standing is severely compromised. It should be merit and merit and nothing but merit. I sympathised with underprivileged section of the society. They should be helped in every possible way but not at the cost of merit.” |
The next question that was raised in the discussion was: “The choice of reservation policy to bring about equality is not appropriate in this context, do you agree with it?”
To this Professor J S Rajput said,” No I would maintain that there is a large section of people who need support, but I would certainly say at this stage we don’t need reservations on the basis of either the Sachar committee, religion or caste. India must give up the caste system. Politicians should not be allowed to play havoc with the unity of the country. “
Contentious issue of merit
The anti-reservationist student body from IIM Calcutta says that reservations are anti-merit and they only solidify the exisiting caste structure.
“The very basis of social discrimination in India is caste as we are the only society, which believes men are born unequal. It is believed that only some people have the right for education others don’t. If people lack the merit its our job to bring them up to the level which is needed to study that subject. And only in India we think some people can be denied education because of certain level,” Professor Khanna said.
Disputing Professor Khanna’s opinion Professor Rajput said that everybody has the right to education but that the Government should take proper steps towards ensuring education to all.
"Today everybody has the right to education but they need schools. The Government should have given priority to opening good functional schools instead of reservations. Now there are many states where SCs, STs have are in the top most institutions but without a solid educational background -- all due to reservations,” he added.
"The substance of the SC is quite clear. The government will have to come out with credibility whatever steps they want to take in the future. Mr Arjun Singh talks about constitutional steps that one have to tell him that the primary requirement of the constitution is creation of welfare state. Can we create a welfare state?” |
Prof Rajput was of the opinion that the Government was abdicating its responsibility of primary education by bringing about quotas in higher education.
However, Professor Khanna disputed this argument saying that the fight was about ideological hegemony and institutions like IIT and IIM make up that ideology in India.
"It is this space which people from backward castes are asking for and I think it’s legitimate to give it to them," he said.
He said that the point that most anti-reservationist seem to be reiterating was that merit will be compromised whenever the reservation issue comes up. He alleged that the upper caste used this argument to show that they were better.
"SC has said nothing about merit here. It has only said we need the right data for it. The Constitution accepts positive discrimination based on caste because that is the basis of social inequality in India not economic inequality. We are only talking about the social inequality in India which comes from education which comes from ideological position in the caste hierarchy and it is to set right this, that’s the constitution was framed," Professor Khanna said.
The year 2006 was the year of the big reservation debate. The Government’s move to bring in quotas for OBC's in higher education sparked student protests across the country. The debate may have been given a decisive turn on Thursday but it’s definitely not the last word on the ever-contentious issue.
SC OBSERVATIONS | |
 | Reservation cannot be permanent and appear to perpetrate backwardness. |
| Nowhere in the world, castes queue to be branded as backward. Nowhere is there a competition to become backward. |
| With this Act, the subject of the equality is unduly put under strain. |
| What may have been the data in 1931 census, cannot be a determinative factor now. |
| There is no explanation as to why there is no firm data for determining backwardness. |
| Unless and until it is determined by the Centre who is socially and economically backward, this Act cannot really be given effect. |
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter and Google+)
displayed with permission. Use of the CNN name and/or logo on or as part of CNN-IBN does not derogate from the intellectual property rights of Cable News Network in respect of them.