| Published on 14-04-2008 In National | | Viewed 1954 times | | OBC Reservation--- The final word has now been said, let's accept it |
|
| Written by
Girish Nikam | 
There is finality, hopefully, now to the entire debate on the reservation for OBCs in Central Government and its allied higher educational institutions in the country. The seal of approval from the highest court of the land should bring it about, notwithstanding the legal nitpickings, which is bound to be there. The arguments and counter arguments for and against the quota which had periodically convulsed the country (the convulsions were felt more in the Hindi belt) has taken enough toll on the student community, and it is high time everyone settles down to accepting it as fait accompli.
The day the five-member constitution bench delivered the judgement earlier this week, the web sites carrying the stories, were full of anguished blogs from the anti-quota visitors to these sites. The hope which they had nurtured, following the stay order granted by a two member bench in March 2007, to the act brought in by the UPA Government to implement reservation, proved false. They had obviously celebrated victory prematurely. All the revelry they had indulged in before the TV cameras had numbed them to believe that the apex court will probably not uphold the legislation. But that was not to be, and therefore their anguish was understandable. It was interesting that many of these bloggers targeted the BJP when it welcomed the judgement, as they had seen it to be their saviours.
The final judgement not only upholding quota for OBCs in higher education, but also the contentious issue of basing caste as a parameter for reservations, has also put paid to the myriad arguments against it. The argument that basing reservation on caste, divides society has been negated firmly by the apex court. Those who have argued on these lines have always tended to overlook the deep rooted caste system which has prevailed in this country, for thousands of years. And many of those who make these remarks have been the active perpetrators of it. No one can argue that the "lower" castes have perpetrated the caste system, and that they invented it. Caste system, as long as it was weighed in favour of the upper castes has been welcomed. Now that it hurts them, this section obviously finds it disdainful.
As far as the merit argument is concerned, many statistics provided by the Veerappa Moily Committee which went into the whole issue last year, has amply demonstrated that the petitioner's fears of these reservations creating "intellectual pygmies" is completely unfounded. One can go through it in one of the earlier articles on this issue. ( Quota Debate again: Will updating data change the ground reality? ). Coming back to the judgement itself, curiously the basis on which the Act was stayed by the two-member bench, thereby delaying the process of implementing reservations in IIMs, IITs, AIIMS and other institutions, does not find a place. The main reason why the two judges Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice L.S. Panta had stayed it was that they disagreed that the census of 1931 which was the basis for creating reservations for OBCs in the Mandal Commission report, was adequate.
Many, including this column, had argued that updating data would not change the ground reality. And that this country consists of a majority population of OBCs, SCs and STs is a glaring fact, and that 27 percent reservation to them, is actually far less than their actual numbers. The five judge bench, in its wisdom has not dwelt on this issue, and rightly so. Nothing drastically different would emerge out of such updating, and moreover, the same opponents of quota also oppose caste-based census. So how do you determine the population size of each caste?
Is the judgement a fair one? Of course for the naysayers it can never be. But what else can the apex court have done? How could it have denied reservations to OBCs in higher education, after having accepted it in employment? It must be remembered that following the Inder Sawhney judgement in 1993, which opened the doors for reservation for OBCs in jobs in central government and allied institutions, following it up in education was just a corollary. It just happened that many successive governments dilly dallied over it, till the UPA Government took it upon itself to implement it.
There is reams being written and much is being made of how the Government has been humiliated by the apex court insisting on keeping the creamy layer out of the quota ambit. Again this is nothing for anyone to crow about. Because in the Inder Sawhney judgement the apex court had clearly laid out the policy on creamy layer. And it has been kept out of the ambit ever since while granting reservation to OBCs in employment. The fact that creamy layer was included in the ambit of the Act in relation to education, was because of the pressure faced by the Manmohan Singh Government from some of its allies. Even the Government knew that it is not legally sustainable. Now Dr.Singh and Sonia Gandhi can absolve themselves of the blame. That is realpolitik for you. Something which one cannot take umbrage to, really.
Now is this judgement going to be politically beneficial to any one particular party? Obviously the Congress and its allies in the UPA will seek to get the maximum political mileage out of it. Left parties are also not going to be left behind. And they cannot be faulted for it. They can rightfully claim to have done something "historic". Of course, the BJP which always finds itself caught between two stools on such issues is despaired, though it did not lose much time in welcoming the judgement. This judgement coming as it does on the eve of elections to many States during the year, with Karnataka being the first to go to polls, is bound to have a political fall out. But how far it will actually benefit the ruling party and its allies is still a matter of conjecture. What however those who have opposed it have to accept is that the last word has been said on the issue. As Soli Sorabjee, an eminent lawyer who himself was against the quota, puts it, "It behoves all to accept it (the judgement) and draw a curtain on these contentious issues. There has to be finality. It is impossible to please all". Maybe five years down the line, we can do a study and find out if the quota has really produced "intellectual pygmies" or confident young men and women out there in the world on a level playing field. |
|
|
|
|
| Social Web |  |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
Processing please wait ...
Top Stories
