Font size:
Print
Subdivision of Quotas
Context:
India’s reservation system, established to uplift historically marginalised communities like the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs), has aimed to correct long-standing social and economic exclusion.
More on News:
- For over 75 years, it has opened pathways in education, government employment, and public offices for communities once relegated to society’s margins.
- However, there are now questions about whether the system is meeting its intended goals, especially as some SC subgroups appear to benefit more than others.
- Triggered by a recent Supreme Court ruling, debates have emerged on whether a “quota-within-quota” approach could make affirmative action more equitable across SC subgroups.
- This idea proposed dividing the SC quota to better support the most disadvantaged groups within it.
- States like Punjab have experimented with such policies, but the effectiveness of these subdivisions remains disputed.
An Overview of Caste-Based Quotas:
- Deep-Rooted Inequalities: Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, who was instrumental in drafting the Indian Constitution, emphasised that mere legal equality wouldn’t dismantle the deep-rooted caste inequalities.
- Legal to Substantive Equality: Therefore, reservations were introduced to help move from legal equality to substantive equality by creating opportunities for SCs and STs in higher education, government jobs, and public offices.
- SC Observations: Yet, the Supreme Court’s recent observations suggest that India’s reservation system is producing uneven outcomes, with some SC groups progressing faster than others.
- Nuanced Approach: This has led to calls for a more nuanced affirmative action approach that recognises differences within the SC category itself.
What Data from Different States Tells Us:
- Andhra Pradesh: Data shows minimal differences between the two major SC groups, Malas and Madigas, with both seeing improvements in education and employment.
- Tamil Nadu: It also presents a similar story, with its two largest SC groups — Adi Dravida and Pallan — achieving comparable socio-economic outcomes by 2019.
- Punjab: Where the SC quota has been subdivided since 1975, this policy appears to have benefited more disadvantaged groups like the Mazhabi Sikhs and Balmikis, who have begun catching up to more advanced groups such as the Ad Dharmis and Ravidasis.
- Bihar: Conversely, Bihar’s attempt to subdivide the SC quota in 2007 by creating a “Mahadalit” category met challenges, as political pressures eventually led to the inclusion of all SC groups in the category, diluting its purpose.
- A broader observation is that while disparities exist within the SC category, the gap between SC groups and upper-caste groups is still far more significant.
Access to Reservations:
- Reliable jati-wise data on reservation usage remains limited.
- A question from the India Human Development Survey (IHDS), asking if individuals possess a caste certificate (a prerequisite for accessing reserved positions in education and employment), provides a rough estimate of access.
- In Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, fewer than 50% of SC households reported holding these certificates, suggesting that many SCs are unable to access the benefits intended for them.
- Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh perform better, with 60-70% of SC households holding certificates, but they remain exceptions.
- This highlights a fundamental issue with the current system — access.
- Without ensuring that all eligible SCs can benefit from reservations, subdividing the quota is secondary. The priority should be improving access to reservations universally to enable all entitled SCs to take advantage of these benefits.
Is Quota-Within-Quota the Solution?
- The idea of a “quota-within-quota” has merit in places like Punjab, where clear disparities between SC subgroups exist.
- However, in states like Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, data indicates that benefits are already fairly evenly distributed, making further subdivision less necessary.
- Political influences often complicate the effectiveness of quota subdivisions, as seen in Bihar, where decisions about inclusion in disadvantaged categories can be driven by political motivations rather than evidence.
- This risks turning affirmative action into a political tool rather than a genuine instrument for social justice.
- The Supreme Court’s proposal to introduce a “creamy layer” exclusion for SCs — similar to the policy for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) — needs to be approached with caution.
- While income could determine eligibility for monetary benefits like scholarships, class improvement alone does not eliminate discrimination for historically marginalised groups.
- Economic mobility has yet to erase the stigma of untouchability, both in India and globally.
- While reservations have helped create a Dalit middle class, which might gradually reduce stigma, the time may not yet be ripe for creamy layer exclusion within SCs.
The Need for Updated Data:
- The pressing need for updated, accurate data cannot be overstated.
- India’s delayed national Census is the only comprehensive source that can reveal caste-based disparities.
- Without it, efforts to reform the system are likely to rely on incomplete or outdated evidence.
