Sub-Categorisation of Reservations

The Commission to Examine Sub-categorisation of Other Backward Classes which took charge on October 11, 2017 is headed by retired Delhi High Court Chief Justice G Rohini, includes Centre for Policy Studies director Dr J K Bajaj as member, and has two other ex-officio members.

 

It now has four terms of reference:

·      To examine the extent of inequitable distribution of benefits of reservation among the castes or communities included in the broad category of OBCs with reference to such classes included in the Central List;

·      To work out the mechanism, criteria, norms and parameters in a scientific approach for sub-categorisation within such OBCs;

·      To take up the exercise of identifying the respective castes or communities or sub-castes or synonyms in the Central List of OBCs and classifying them into their respective sub-categories.

·      To study the various entries in the Central List of OBCs and recommend correction of any repetitions, ambiguities, inconsistencies and errors of spelling or transcription.

 

OBCs (2600 communities) are granted 27% reservation in jobs and education under the central government. There is a perception that a few better off communities have secured a lion’s share of the benefits of reservation. Categorisation has been demanded by some of the less affluent communities seeking equity in sharing the benefits of reservation.

 

The phenomenon is not new and the creamy layer concept now existing in OBC reservation is an example of the same. Under the current rules, a household with an annual income of Rs 8 lakh or above is classified as belonging to the ‘creamy layer’ among OBCs and hence is not eligible for reservation in government jobs and government-funded educational institutions. The ceiling has been continuously raised was raised thrice — from Rs 1 lakh in 1993 to Rs 2.5 lakh in 2004, to Rs 4.5 lakh in 2008 and then to Rs 6 lakh in 2013. Further, those who hold constitutional positions and enter Class-A positions in the government sector are automatically included in the creamy layer.

 

There is now a demand to raise the ceiling to Rs 12 lakh and also a call for including the salary in calculating the gross annual income. This would mean that practically no existing government employee would be eligible for reservation.

 

Categorisation of BCs is not new and already exists in the southern states of AP, Telangana and Tamil Nadu. In 1968 the Government of Andhra Pradesh have appointed a Commission in to determine the criteria to be adopted in considering whether any sections of citizens of AP may be treated as Social and Educationally Backward Classes and in-accordance with such criteria prepare a list of such Backward Classes. The Commission adopted the criteria of general poverty, Occupations pursued, Caste and educational levels to determine backwardness. Basing on the recommendations of Anantharaman Commission the Education Department issued orders in 1970 communicating the list of Social and Educationally Backward Classes. All these communities are divided in four groups: Group A (Aboriginal Tribes-7%), Group B(Vocation groups-10%), Group C(SCs converted to christianity-2%), Group D(others-7%) and Group E(Muslims-4%).

 

It is a matter of time before the OBC reservation of 27% is going to be split into sub-categories.

 

More on sub-categorisation: Last week, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court reopened the legal debate on sub-categorisation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes for reservations, referring the issue to a larger Bench to decide. There have been some previous attempts at categorisation of Scheduled castes, which were struck down in courts on the grounds of being ultra-vires of the constitution. Now, with the supreme court referring the matter to a larger bench, there seems to be a likelihood of sub-categorisation of Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes finding legal acceptance and actually taking place.