My Reservations

I just finished reading Arun Shourie’s “Falling Over Backwards:An Essay against Reservations and against Judicial Populism”. I’d started reading the book earlier but quit midway because I found it repetitive. Given that the aim of the book is to make as large a swathe of the populations as possible aware of the perils of reservation, as opposed to just specialists (lawyers), the repetitiveness is perhaps excusable. In any case, I’m glad I did finish it, because Mr. Shourie has some excellent points to make and some startling data to share. Some key takeaways-

1. The Framers of the Constitution were aware of the distinction between ‘class’ and ‘caste’ and their exists both intrinsic and extrinsic evidence that the two words were not used interchangeably. From an originalist point of view, the interpretation placed upon ‘class’ by both the Supreme Court and by politicians is unsustainable.

2. The 1921 and 1931 Census Commissioners reported that various segments of society were trying to portray themselves as belonging to higher castes. There was a great degree of fluidity and it was recommended that the Caste column be done away with altogether. This upward mobility should be contrasted with the current struggle for downward mobility where each faction is keen to get itself classified as an SC/ST/OBC. The methodology and conclusions of the Mandal Commission which based itself on the 1931 data are also exposed as farcical. It’s horrifying to think that the edifice (or rather, facade of reservations) is constructed on such unsound foundations. That no better data exists is evident from the reluctance of the Govt. to place new data before the 2 judge bench headed by Justice Pasayat which stayed reservations in IITs/IIMs.

3. Reservations in promotions with consequential seniority has led to absurd results in the public services. Reservationists supersede people 10 years their senior, and most of the top posts are completely reserved for the foreseeable future. This has led to large scale demoralisation. There is absolutely no incentive to join any public service unless one belongs to the ‘right’ caste. The extent to which standards have either been abysmally lowered or altogether done away with cannot but prove detrimental to the efficiency of administration. The mandate of Art. 335 has been completely ignored.

4. Equality of opportunity has been confused with equality of outcomes. Substandard candidates are admitted and once they prove themselves to be incapable of competing with non-reservationists, this is pointed to as proof of facts that more reservations are needed and that reservations cannot be confined to the admission stage.

5. Anybody who dares to speak against reservations is branded a ‘merit-monger’ or ‘oppressor of the downtrodden’. A dispassionate and civilised debate on the issue has become impossible. Privately, many politicians are aware of the havoc wrought by reservations, but vote bank politics means that nobody can afford to speak out.

6. The ‘progressive’ judges of the Supreme Court have all too often substituted high flown rhetoric for empirical evidence when it has suited them to do so. Their ipse dixits and prejudices have all contributed to the quicksand of reservations. Timorousness and deference have prevented even those judges who do not subscribe to the progressive creed from making any impact on the course of things (witness the convoluted judgment of the Supreme Court in M. Nagraj v. UOI, the 2006 case which rejected the challenge to Arts. 16(4A) and 16(4B) and perpetuated the idiocy that these Articles are facets of equality (as opposed to deviations from the general rule of equality).

The penultimate chapter of the book, written over a year back, is prophetic. Mr. Shourie warned that the congealment of political and social interests around the canker of caste cannot but lead to communal discord. He expressly cited the example of the Gujjar’s (p. 339) and the growing unrest among them which was evident even then to civil servants in the State. Alas, Mr. Shourie is condemned to the fate shared by all wise men who have the misfortune of witnessing the decline of republics- they are condemned as Cassandras by the clamouring mob. We may commend to ourselves the words of Joseph Story “Republics fall when the wise are banished from the public councils, because they dare to be honest, and the profligate are rewarded, because they flatter the people, in order to betray them.”

I also read the full text of Rajiv Gandhi’s speech in Parliament on Mandal. After reading it, I am utterly convinced that the Congress just about exemplifies hypocrisy for having the gumption to enhance reservations and justify them by pointing to the Mandal Report. Also, VP Singh should be vilified rather than being venerated like some precious political relic.


Alternatives

Mr. Shourie also points out that while economic criteria are accepted for the purposes of the PDS and for determining the creamy layer qua reservations themselves, they are mysteriously termed ‘unsuitable’ for replacing caste as the basis of reservation measures. Recent newspaper reports prove that BPL criteria are also exploited and people try and get their names on these lists by hook or crook. It was recently reported that Gopalkrishna Gandhi’s (Governor of West Bengal) name figured in one such list, an example of the ease with which they can be manipulated.

Assuming all this to be true, the adoption of economic criteria would still be the lesser of the two evils. A nation divided along economic lines must, in the last resort, be preferred to one divided along communal lines.