English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

Is the Bill for 10 per cent reservation for general category a ‘jumla’?

Published

on

Is the Bill for 10 per cent reservation for general category a ‘jumla’?

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

The first part of this piece covers the political compulsions of the government in introducing the Bill and the reasons for the Opposition to back it.

But there are real doubts and questions, not the least of them being whether Modi’s “landmark moment in nation’s history” does mean anything at all.

Questions about the Bill

Would it make any difference? To begin with, the criteria for ‘poor’ – urban house less than 1000 square feet, annual income less than Rs 8 lakh, land less than 5 acres – would include more than 90 per cent of the population.

By any estimate, more than 10 per cent of this category manage to bag jobs even without reservation. So, does this reservation result in any real gain to this category? The real question is, are there any jobs to be had? Last reports said over 1.1 crore jobs were lost in 2018. It would appear that the government’s main intention is to deflect criticism at its failure to provide jobs.

How did the government come up with the ‘10 per cent’ for quota?

Was there any survey to determine the number of persons who fit the criteria fixed for ‘poor’?

Is there any data about number of such ‘poor’ not getting jobs?

How would the government determine cases where the income goes up or decreases, or fluctuates?

The answer is no. This is just a move done without any thought, just because it seemed like a grand idea at the moment. Leap first, look later – as in the case of demonetisation.

In fact, a likely (positive?) impact of this move would be on those upper caste people who keep railing against reservation for dalits and backward classes: it would shut them up.

Legality of the move

Further, while the government goes around claiming to have insulated the Bill from being struck down by judiciary by changing the Constitutional provisions, serious questions have been raised about this.

Former Chief Justice of India AM Ahmadi, who was part of the landmark 1992 Mandal Commission verdict, which capped reservation at 50 per cent, told The Indian Express (IE) that the BJP-ruled government’s move is “directly in conflict” with the Supreme Court judgment on reservations.

Justice Ahmadi was part of the nine-judge Constitution bench headed by then Chief Justice MN Venkatachaliah in the Indra Sawhney vs Union of India case, which settled the legal position on reservations. The 6:3 majority verdict held that reservation, being an extreme form of protective measure or affirmative action, should be confined to a minority of seats. “Even though the Constitution does not lay down any specific bar but the Constitutional philosophy being against proportional equality the principle of balancing equality ordains reservation, of any manner, not to exceed 50 per cent,” the majority view had said.

Ahmadi said that the apex court’s 50 per cent ceiling was to ensure that “reservations are not introduced, and the limit increased, only for election purposes”.

Also Read: Modi govt approves 10 per cent quota for economically weak in general category

Ahmadi pointed out that the 6:3 majority judgment of the nine-judge bench said that economic criterion cannot be the sole basis for determining the backward class of citizens contemplated by Article 16 of the Constitution.

The Constitution bench had held that “Economic backwardness may give jurisdiction to state to reserve provided it can find out mechanism to ascertain inadequacy of representation of such class. But such group or collectivity does not fall under Article 16 (1).”

Asked if the government’s decision to exceed the 50 per cent ceiling was legally valid, Justice Ahmadi said: “The judgment clearly mentions that reservations should not exceed 50 per cent. The Supreme Court had put a cap so that reservations are not introduced, and the limit increased, only for election purposes. With this decision, now what remains is just 40 per cent.”

Writing in IE, Vice chancellor, NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad, Faizan Mustafa, held that the Bill is likely to be struck down by the SC.

He said that the apex court has laid down in categorical terms that reservation solely on the basis of economic backwardness, that is without evidence of historical discrimination, finds no justification in the Constitution. A nine-judge bench in Indra Sawhney had ruled that reservation is a remedy for historical discrimination and its continuing ill-effects. The court also said that reservation is not aimed at economic uplift or poverty alleviation. Economic backwardness is to be on account of social backwardness.

The backwardness mentioned under Article 16(1) must be the backwardness that is both the cause and consequence of non-representation in the state administration. It has to be backwardness of the whole class, not of some individuals, said Faizan Mustafa. The economic criterion will thus lead, in effect, to the virtual deletion of Article 16(4) from the Constitution. Hence, economic backwardness has to be on account of social backwardness under Article 16(4).

Moreover, the move upsets the 50 per cent cap imposed by the SC on reservation. Justice Thommen in Indra Sawhney said that “any attempt to over-emphasise its compensatory aspect and widen the scope of reservation beyond ‘minority of posts’ is to practice excessive and invidious reverse discrimination”.

BR Ambedkar in his speech in the Constituent Assembly on November 30, 1948, explicitly said that equality of opportunity would require that reservation should be for the “minority of the seats” and only in favour of “backward classes who had not so far had representation in the state”.

The weaker sections as mentioned in Article 46 are a genus of which the backward class of citizens mentioned in Article 16(4) constitute a species. Thus, only backward classes, and not all the weaker sections, are entitled to reservation. Caste and class are not synonymous. Class is not antithetical to caste, caste is an enclosed class. Ambedkar, at the time of the first amendment, which inserted clause 4 in Article 15, told Parliament that “backward classes are nothing else but a collection of castes”. Class here is social class. Thus, economic backwardness must be the result of social backwardness.

Read Part 1: Modi govt’s Bill for 10 pc quota to general category poor may be passed, but is it just a jumla?

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Latest Politics News

Punjab Congress faction games hold up who will lead party as poll approaches

The Congress leadership is expected to finalize the new Punjab Congress chief soon as factions oppose Amarinder Singh Raja Warring continuance as chief.

Published

on

mallikarjun-kharge

The Congress leadership is likely to decide the name of a new Punjab Pradesh Congress Comittee (PPCC) president in light of the growing factional differences emerging within the party state unit.

The decision by party president Mallikarjun Kharge on choosing the head of the state unit is likely to be finalized after he takes note of other senior leaders’ opinions on the matter, as differences over the continuation of Amarinder Singh Raja Warring as PPCC president has led to former Chief Minister Charanjit Singh Channi pitching his hat in the ring.

The leadership crisis has reflected the diverging interests of opposing factions in the Punjab Congress. Channi has the backing of several party leaders including Bharat Bhushan Ashu, Gurpreet Singh Kangar, Darshan Singh Brar, and Nazar Singh Manshahia, among other supporters of Channi, while another faction is supporting incumbent chief Warring.

The Congress needs to stem the crisis soon since the state is headed for elections next year as the term of the Bhagwant Mann-led Aam Aadmi Party government winds down. Many in the party have said that having a widely accepted state leader can strengthen the organizational structure.

The delay in decision-making has caused speculation with some senior leaders meeting BJP heavyweights in Delhi. Though these leaders have dismissed any rumours of switching sides, the strain among the factions is telling on party unity. But given the way several Rajya Sabha MPs of the Aam Aadmi Party switched to the BJP, nothing can be ruled out as election fever picks up.

Continue Reading

India News

Congress MP Manish Tewari says terror must end before India-Pakistan dialogue resumes

Congress MP Manish Tewari has questioned calls to restart India-Pakistan dialogue, arguing that meaningful talks cannot resume until Pakistan takes verifiable action against terrorism.

Published

on

Congress MP says decades of peace initiatives have repeatedly been followed by terror attacks and calls for verifiable action against terrorism before any engagement

Congress MP Manish Tewari has questioned renewed calls to resume dialogue between India and Pakistan, saying any discussion with Islamabad must first address the issue of cross-border terrorism. Responding to an appeal by 117 eminent personalities from both countries seeking the restoration of diplomatic engagement, Tewari asked whether such talks could be meaningful without concrete action against terror infrastructure.

Speaking on Friday, the Congress leader said successive Indian governments had consistently attempted to improve relations with Pakistan, but those efforts were repeatedly undermined by terrorist attacks.

According to Tewari, governments led by P.V. Narasimha Rao, H.D. Deve Gowda, I.K. Gujral, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Manmohan Singh and Prime Minister Narendra Modi all pursued dialogue with Pakistan through formal negotiations or backchannel diplomacy. However, he claimed that each attempt was followed by acts of terrorism.

Calls for proof of dismantling terror infrastructure

Tewari said the key issue was whether Pakistan had provided any verifiable assurance that it had dismantled its terror infrastructure.

Referring to former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, he said a public commitment had been made after the Parliament attack to act against terrorism, but the assurance was later withdrawn. He added that similar commitments made during the tenures of former Prime Ministers Manmohan Singh and Narendra Modi also failed to produce lasting results.

Questioning the appeal for renewed engagement, Tewari said those advocating talks should clarify what specific issues they intended to discuss while the threat of terrorism remained unresolved.

References Pahalgam terror attack and Indus Waters Treaty

The Congress MP also referred to the Pahalgam terror attack in April 2025, saying it further reinforced India’s concerns regarding terrorism.

He noted that India’s position became even more firm following the attack, pointing to the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty as part of the government’s response.

Commenting on the timing of the letter seeking renewed dialogue, Tewari said India had consistently maintained that terrorism and bilateral talks could not proceed simultaneously. He also reiterated the government’s position that it would not differentiate between terrorists and those responsible for directing such attacks.

Peace remains desirable, but security comes first

While acknowledging that millions of people across South Asia aspire for lasting peace, Tewari argued that meaningful dialogue was not possible as long as terrorism remained a continuing threat.

He said India must first receive credible assurances from Pakistan, beginning with an end to the export of terrorism, before considering any resumption of diplomatic engagement.

Continue Reading

India News

TVK alleges Rs 35 crore MLA bribery bid as Tamil Nadu political row escalates

Allegations of a Rs 35 crore bribery offer to a TVK MLA and an FIR against Senthil Balaji’s brother have intensified political tensions in Tamil Nadu, with the TVK, DMK and AIADMK trading accusations.

Published

on

Actor vijay

The alleged attempt to destabilise the Vijay-led TVK government has triggered a major political confrontation in Tamil Nadu, with the ruling alliance and the opposition accusing each other of engaging in horse-trading and attempts to influence legislators.

The controversy intensified after Chennai Police arrested three people on Wednesday following a complaint by a TVK MLA, who alleged that he was offered ₹35 crore by representatives of a consultancy firm in exchange for supporting a move against the Assembly Speaker. According to the allegations, one of those arrested is reportedly associated with DMK MLA Senthil Balaji and his brother, Ashok.

An FIR has also been registered against Ashok, the brother of Senthil Balaji, over allegations that he attempted to bribe TVK MLA N. Elaiyaraja.

TVK accuses DMK of targeting its MLAs

TVK alleged that the DMK has been attempting to lure its legislators for several weeks in an effort to destabilise the government.

Tamil Nadu minister and senior TVK leader CTR Nirmal Kumar claimed that several TVK MLAs, along with legislators from alliance partners, had been approached over the past 40 days. He alleged that the party had now been “caught red-handed” after the police action and accused the DMK of trying to purchase the support of a TVK MLA for ₹35 crore.

Nirmal Kumar also alleged that a close associate of Senthil Balaji had threatened a TVK legislator and further claimed that former chief minister MK Stalin and Leader of Opposition Udhayanidhi were attempting to create a political crisis. He rejected allegations that the TVK itself was involved in horse-trading, asserting that the ruling alliance remained secure with the support of its partners.

According to the allegations cited by agencies, the purported plan involved securing the simultaneous resignation of 15 TVK MLAs to bring down the Vijay-led government.

Opposition rejects allegations

The DMK dismissed the accusations, alleging that the Vijay-led government was trying to divert attention from its own shortcomings.

DMK leader TKS Elangovan said the government had failed to fulfil its promises and claimed that the TVK alliance itself was engaged in horse-trading. He questioned the allegation that the DMK would seek to engineer political instability under the present circumstances.

The AIADMK also criticised the ruling party, accusing it of attracting legislators from rival parties while questioning its commitment to public welfare. AIADMK chief Edappadi K. Palaniswami said that political manoeuvring and shifting alliances had overshadowed governance.

Alliance partners support TVK government

The TVK’s alliance partners backed the government during the controversy.

Congress MP Praveen Chakravarty questioned why the DMK was allegedly seeking to bring down the government instead of remaining in the opposition, asking why it was in such a hurry to return to power.

VCK leader SS Balaji also reiterated his party’s support for the TVK government for its full five-year term. While stating that he was not aware of the specific allegations regarding attempts to poach legislators, he said that encouraging MLAs to resign was not a healthy democratic practice and reaffirmed the alliance’s commitment to the government.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com