This article has been written by Ishika Sharma, a 1st-year student of Gujarat National Law University.
Introduction:
In order to address the historical injustice done to members of impoverished groups and to put laws in place to improve their access to resources and opportunities, reservations were placed into the constitution as soon as India earned its independence.
In layman’s words, it involves making it easier for particular groups of people to get seats in government offices, educational institutions, and even legislatures. Because of their caste identity, many communities have historically experienced oppression. The reservation might also be viewed as positive discrimination as it is based on quotas.
Let’s understand this in a more detailed way.
History:
The caste-based reservation system was initially developed in 1882 by William Hunter and Jyotirao Phule.
When British Prime Minister Ramsay Macdonald presented the “Communal Award” in 1933, he officially launched the reservation system that is in use today.
Separate electorates for Muslims, Sikhs, Indian Christians, Anglo-Indians, Europeans, and Dalits were provided for in the award.
The “Poona Pact,” which Gandhi and Ambedkar signed after protracted talks, established that there would be a unified Hindu electorate with certain reservations.
Following independence, only reservations were initially offered to SCs and STs.
On the Mandal Commission’s advice, OBCs were included in the reservation system in 1991.
In the Indra Sawhney Case of 1992, the Supreme Court threw down the government announcement reserving 10% of government positions for economically backward classes among the higher castes while preserving the 27% quota for backward classes.
The Supreme Court affirmed the rule that the total number of reservation beneficiaries should not be more than 50% of India’s population in the same case.
Through this ruling and its stipulation that reservations for underprivileged groups should only apply to initial appointments and not promotions, the term “creamy layer” also acquired popularity.
The “economically disadvantaged” now have a 10% reservation in government positions and educational institutions thanks to the Constitutional (103rd Amendment) Act of 2019.
The Act modifies Articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution by introducing provisions allowing for reservations based on economic backwardness to be made by the government.
The 10% economic reserve goes above and beyond the permitted 50%.
Constitutional provision under the Indian constitution:
The reservation of SC and ST in Central and State legislatures is covered in Part XVI.
The State and Central Governments were permitted to reserve seats in government services for SC and ST members thanks to Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution.
The Constitution (77th Amendment) Act of 1995 changed the Constitution, adding a new section (4A) to Article 16 that allows the government to offer reservations for promotions.
Later, the Constitution (85th Amendment) Act, 2001 changed Article (4A) to provide SC and ST candidates elevated under reservation consequential seniority.
The Constitutional 81st Amendment Act of 2000 added Article 16 (4 B), allowing the state to fill any SC/ST-reserved seats that remain unfilled from one year in the next year, thereby eliminating the cap of 50% reservation on the total number of vacancies for that year.
Through the reserve of seats for SCs and STs in the Parliament and State Legislative Assemblies, respectively, Articles 330 and 332 allow for particular representation.
In every Panchayat, seats are reserved for SCs and STs under Article 243D.
In every Municipality, seats are reserved for SCs and STs under Article 233T.
According to Article 335 of the constitution, the claims of STs and STs must be taken into account while preserving the administration’s effectiveness.
Importance of reservation in India:
Past injustice: Caste-based reservation is necessary in India as a result of past injustice and neglect toward certain underprivileged populations.
Level Playing field: A reservation offers a fair playing field since it is impossible for the economically disadvantaged parts to suddenly start competing with those who have had access to education, skills, and economic mobility for generations.
Meritocracy vs. Equality: While meritocracy is crucial, it is meaningless without equality. The difference between top and lower castes was also significantly reduced through caste-based quotas.
Quality of administration: According to a study, reservations have improved quality rather than efficiency in administration. The Indian Railways is the finest example, as more SC/ST personnel work there and the outcomes are better.
Demerits of Reservation:
● The majority of people from lower castes have ascended the social ladder and now enjoy a status equivalent to that of the general populace. So, reservations are no longer necessary.
● A reservation merely offers a minimal and transitory fix for the historical injustice problems.
● Reservation is undoubtedly a tool to combat social and educational illiteracy, but it is not a panacea for all social and economic ills. There are a lot more creative and superior approaches to address such problems. The leadership, however, is unable to develop workable alternatives due to reservations.
● As reservations lower labour productivity, they lower the nation’s pace of economic growth.
Landmark cases:
In A. Peeriakaruppan, etc. v. State of Tamil Nadu, the Hon. Hegde, J. stated: “A caste has always been recognised as a class.” In his ruling in State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. v. U.S.V. Balram etc., the Hon. Vaidialingam, J. upheld the list of “Backward Class” even though it was solely based on caste because the individuals on it met the various criteria established by this Court for determining a class’s social and educational backwardness.
In Kumari K.S. Jayasree and Anr. v., the State of Kerala and Anr., the Hon. Chief Justice Ray expressed the opinion that “considering the caste of the group of people may not be irrelevant in determining the socioeconomic backwardness of the class of citizens.” Caste cannot be the only or deciding factor, though.
in M R Balaji v. Mysore in 1963, the Honourable Court established a 50% cap on reservations. The majority of states did not go beyond the 50% limit, although Rajasthan (68% quota, including 14% for advanced castes, after the Gujjar riots in 2008) and Tamil Nadu (69%, under the 9th category), in 1980, did. Even though the State of Andhra Pradesh attempted to go beyond the limit in 2005, the High Court ordered it to halt. In Indira Sawhney & Ors v. Union of India, the Indian Supreme Court supported the implementation of separate reservations for “Other Backward Classes” in positions with the federal government. This judgment was put into effect.
In S. Vinodkumar Vs. Union of India, it was decided, while taking into account Articles 16(4) and 335, that lower qualifying scores for applicants from the reserved group were not acceptable for promotion. A proviso was added at the end of Article 335 of the Constitution (82nd Amendment Act) as a result of the ruling that it was not acceptable to weaken the requirements for promotion and the assessment standards.
In M. Nagraj & Ors v. Union of India and Ors, it was determined that the alterations were constitutional. The Supreme Court ruled in M. Nagraj anOrs. v. Union of India and Ors. that the State must not only safeguard human dignity but also promote it by taking efforts in that direction.
Aishwarya Says:
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems to secondinnings.hr@gmail.com
Join our Whatsapp Group for latest Job Opening