After the Supreme Court's judgement on the contentious issue of OBC quotas in higher educational institutions, both the protagonists of this divisive debate may be well advised to take refuge in the philosophy so lucidly expounded by Sahir Ludhianvi in a song from Hum Dono: Jo mil gaya usee ko muqaddar samajh liya/ Jo khoya gaya main usko bhulata chala gaya (Whatever I got I accepted as fate, what I lost I decided to forget). It's a verdict that cannot be interpreted as an outright victory for either side, although the principle of caste-based reservation being extended to education has been reiterated. Frankly, no other outcome was possible. The five-judge Bench could not have been expected to overturn the apex court's earlier legitimisation of the recommendations of the Mandal Commission. If quotas are legitimate in procuring Government jobs, how can they be deemed illegitimate in Government-run educational institutions?

But the Court has been extraordinarily circumspect while upholding the validity of reservations. Not only has it specifically excluded the so-called creamy layer among OBCs -- income-tax payees, MPs and MLAs, children of constitutional post holders and so on -- it has also excluded specialised post-graduate courses. On the face of it, Arjun Singh's diabolical move to destroy the quality of internationally celebrated institutions like IIMs, AIIMS and top echelons of IITs, would appear to have been stymied. The Supreme Court is evidently pursuing the goal of progressively limiting the purview of quotas and has sought to curtail its political misuse by dominant sections among the so-called Backward Classes who have grabbed the lion's share of political opportunities.

The most significant aspect of the wide-ranging verdict pertains not so much to the creamy layer but the stipulation that upon completion of graduation a person cannot be considered educationally backward any more. This is indeed a pertinent classification of "backwardness" although it will result in an anomaly insofar as Scheduled Caste/Tribe students are concerned since the Court has, rightly, chosen not to touch any aspect of the existing reservation procedure for that category -- at least for the present. In any case, the creamy layer principle too does not apply to SC/ST quotas. In other words, the verdict has taken a huge step forward in differentiating SC/STs from OBCs. Clearly the judges have gone along with the widely prevalent assessment that OBCs do not suffer the same degree of social or economic deprivation as Dalits or tribals, nor is there a long history of discrimination against the "intermediate" castes, mainly farmers.

Specifically denying quota privileges to political office-holders, MPs and MLAs (past and present) makes eminent sense. Why, for instance, should Lalu Yadav's brood -- recently photographed sashaying across Srinagar's tulip garden in designer outfits -- get precedence over children of impoverished Brahmins of Bihar's Mithilanchal? With both parents having served as Chief Ministers and the family patriarch now calling the shots not only in the Railway Ministry but also the UPA Government as a whole, the children or their future progeny cannot justify special concessions to enable them get past more meritorious applicants. The same logic would apply to Mulayam Singh's family and a host of BJP and Congress leaders too. Interestingly, this provision is not relevant to the country's communist leaders for they are almost exclusively upper caste!

The Supreme Court has also been resolute in clarifying the extent to which qualifications can be relaxed for quota beneficiaries. There was an outcry some years ago when a few students who got between one and 10 per cent marks in the qualifying examination were cleared for admission under the SC/ST quota in premier medical institutions. This led the authorities to codify the extent of relaxation so that such bizarre situations did not arise. Now the apex court has specified that five grace marks may be given to OBC applicants so that they get a reasonable handicap but not an absurd quantum of advantages. This should ensure a fair degree of equality of opportunity for students from less privileged backgrounds.

Under the circumstances, the Supreme Court verdict can be best described as pragmatic. The highest seat of the judiciary, headed by India's first Dalit Chief Justice, has averted a head-on collision with the political establishment, while circumscribing the latter's politically cynical ploy. The judiciary cannot be unaware that irrespective of their private views, no legislator, no political party, can overtly oppose caste-based reservations. VP Singh's stealthy acceptance of the Mandal recommendations changed India's political dynamics and it would be fanciful to expect the clock to be turned back. In fact, the Court's pious exhortation to review the quota provisions every five years will fall on deaf years. Privileges once conferred are almost impossible to roll back in India's intensely competitive democracy. BR Ambedkar's half-hearted acceptance of SC/ST reservations (which he described as "crutches" soon to be discarded), stipulated a maximum period of 10 years for them to remain operative. Nearly 60 years since the Constitution was promulgated, everything barring this provision of the original document is celebrated.

Regrettably, the Supreme Court did not persist with its original query when it admitted the petition challenging the Constitution's 93rd Amendment. The judges had repeatedly sought to know from the Government the basis of specifying 27.5 per cent quotas for OBCs since the last credible caste census was conducted in 1931 under British rule. BP Mandal had arrived at this figure after estimating India's OBC population to be 52 per cent by extrapolating 1931 Census data, while keeping in mind an earlier SC order that reservations should not exceed 50 per cent. Hypocritical Governments since Independence have consistently refused to conduct a caste enumeration claiming they are wedded to the abolition of this iniquitous Hindu social system. Several National Sample Survey results put the current OBC figure at only around 40 per cent; some random surveys suggest it may be as low as 32 per cent. Since official policy is increasingly determined by caste, the apex court would have done a great service had it ordered at least a sample survey to be undertaken without fanfare. That would have ended the guessing game on OBC numbers and helped future policy makers, sociologists and even political leaders.

Most importantly, though, the Court could have demanded a serious re-look at Article 15 of the Constitution which empowers the State to make special provisions for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes -- a terminology that has come to be interpreted simply as Backward Castes. Why is it so difficult to insert "economic" in the definition of backwardness? The Court has attempted to use the economic criterion to exclude certain categories -- the creamy layer -- although it should ideally be used to include those sections that suffer from economic disadvantages, irrespective of caste. For example, the extensive Below Poverty Line (BPL) enumeration that it periodically conducted, could well be made the basic criterion for reservations along with other indices of backwardness such as caste, residence in an impoverished or remote area, and so on. Nevertheless, I believe the Supreme Court has taken one step forward in the direction of curbing casteist fanaticism and applied brakes on the mindless expansion on reservations. Hopefully, Justice Bhandari's erudite verdict ruling out quota extension to private unaided colleges will lead to drawing a rational lakshman rekha on political adventurism.

Courtesy: www.dailypioneer.com, April 13, 2008