History of OBC Reservation

Under Article 340 of the Indian constitution it is obligatory for the government to promote the welfare of the Other Backward Classes.

The first Backward Classes Commission headed by Shri kaka kalelkar in 1953, and Mandal Commission headed by Shri B.P.Mandal in 1980 has given many useful recommendations for the welfare of Other Backward Classes. The population of OBC’s which includes Hindus and Non-Hindus was around 52% of the total population according to the commission.

27% of reservation was recommended owing to legal constraints that the total quantum of reservation should not exceed 50%.

One of the most important recommendations is that all private sector undertakings which have received financial assistance from the government in one form or another should be obliged to recruit personnel on the reservation basis. But, even after 2 decades we are unable to get it inspite of our continuous efforts.

On August 7 1990, the then Prime Minister Shri. V P Singh announced that his National Front Government was going to implement Mandal Commission recommendations in Education and jobs, inspite of strong agitations from Forward Communities. In fact, Shri V P Singh lost his power due to his mandalisation policy. The federation remembers him on this special day for his service rendered to this community.

One needs to understand the psychology of opposition of reservation to OBC’s.

When the jobs are nowhere and everything is gone private, then why are the upper castes angry with the reservation for Backward Communities?

The fact is that seats for dalits were rarely fulfilled and we have seen huge backlog. There has been no protest. It was easier to curtail the protest of the dalits because of their numbers and social background.

Now the reservation for backward communities being a reality, the powerful backward communities will hit and break the bone of upper castes. That is the fear of this community. They know that there are enough students from these communities who will join great institutes of technology and management.

The Supreme Court of India on April 10 2008 upheld the government’s move for initiating 27% OBC quotas in Govt. funded Institutions. But it is necessary for the Govt. at this juncture to exclude the creamy layer policy from the reservation quota.

To be strong in the present scenario, it is more important to show our strength and unity of OBC’s. AIOBC association work towards social justice. AIOBC is giving hand and helping us in this regard.

The issue of under-representation of the socio-economically deprived, discriminated backward caste and classes in the spheres of education, employment, administration and commerce is burning at this stage. I appeal all the member associations to work hard towards the success of the reservation policies.

Let us truly reform our society and work for a truly democratic India, where every community participates in power and every person gets their reservation in respective areas in proportion to their shares in population.

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Merit candidates can migrate to reserved category in civil services: court

The Supreme Court on Friday held that candidates in the ‘Meritorious Reserved Category' (MRC) selected on merit and placed in the ‘general/unreserved category' in the Central Civil Services Examination could be given a choice to opt for a service of higher preference in terms of Rule 16 (2) of the CSE Rules.


This rule says: “While making service allocation, candidates belonging to SC/ST or OBCs recommended against unreserved candidates may be adjusted against reserved vacancies by the government if by this process they get a service of higher choice in the order of their preference.”

A Constitution Bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justices S.H. Kapadia, R.V. Raveendran, B. Sudershan Reddy and P. Sathasivam said: “The reserved candidates belonging to the OBC/SC/ST categories who are selected on merit and placed in the list of general/unreserved category can choose to migrate to the respective reserved category at the time of allocation of services. Such migration as envisaged under Rule 16 (2) is not inconsistent with Rule 16 (1) or Articles 14, 16 (4) and 335 of the Constitution.”

The Centre appealed against a Madras High Court judgment holding ultra vires and unconstitutional Rule 16 (2) and directing it to rework service allocation dehors Rule 16 (2). Certain writ petitions were also filed. The Supreme Court stayed the judgment and referred the matter to a larger Bench.

Now, the CJI, writing the judgment, said: “MRC candidates who avail themselves of the benefit of Rule 16 (2) and are adjusted in the reserved category should be counted as part of the reserved pool for the purpose of computing the aggregate reservation quotas. The seats vacated by MRC candidates in the general pool will be offered to general category candidates.”

Two classes

The Bench said: “By operation of Rule 16 (2), the reserved status of an MRC candidate is protected so that his/her better performance does not deny him/her the chance to be allotted to a more preferred service. The amended Rule 16 (2) only seeks to recognise the inter se merit between two classes — (a) meritorious reserved category candidates and (b) relatively low ranked reserved category candidates — for the purpose of allocation to the various Civil Services with due regard for the preferences indicated by them.”

The Bench said: “When MRC candidates are put in the general list on their own merit they do not automatically relinquish their reserved status. By operation of Rule 16 (2) the reserved status of an MRC candidate is protected so that his/her better performance does not deny such candidate the chance to be allotted to a more preferred service.”

No comments:

Post a Comment