On August 7, 1990, prime minister V.P. Singh, driven by his own set of political difficulties, announced in Parliament that the Mandal Commission’s recommendations for reservation for Other Backward Classes would be implemented. It was a turning point for the Indian political system, marking the advent of what came to be known as Mandal politics that was centred on the interests of the backward class voter and transforming the nature of electoral politics with the rise of leaders like Mulayam Singh Yadav, Lalu Prasad, Nitish Kumar and Sharad Yadav.
Three decades later, the country, which is on the cusp of a general election, is witnessing the return of Mandal politics. There is a growing clamour for a caste-based census, with the opposition parties seeking to make it their main election plank. Leaders of the opposition alliance have stressed on carrying out a caste-based census and raising the 50 per cent ceiling on reservation. The results of the caste-based survey carried out in Bihar, which pegs the number of extremely backward classes and other backward classes together at 63 per cent, provide a statistical basis for the demands being made for proportionate reservation and a caste count at the national level.
The last time a caste census was held was in 1931. The Mandal Commission’s recommendations are also based on figures extrapolated from that data. A major point of argument in favour of a caste census is that schemes and affirmative action today are based on outdated figures. OBC leaders believe that their share of the population could be around 60 per cent of the country’s total, and some say it could even be more than 70 per cent. A simmering demand for representation based on current figures now appears to have taken the form of an idea that is irresistible, both socially and politically.
The social sentiment that is being articulated by the political parties is about finding a remedy to the prevailing situation where power and resources are seen as concentrated in the hands of a small section of society. It is felt that political representation has not translated into institutional representation. “To tackle the problem of the oligarchic rule of the Hindu upper caste, the representation of the other sections in the institutions has to be enhanced. Each community’s strength needs to be counted and adequate representation provided to them,” said eminent legal scholar G. Mohan Gopal. “Why has it not been done? Because it is feared that the numbers of the communities that dominate the power structures are much less than their representation.”
A highlight of what could be described as Mandal 2.0 is the spectacular change of stance of the Congress on the subject of caste census and reservation for OBCs. At its plenary session in Raipur earlier this year, besides supporting caste census, the Congress also resolved to bring in reservation for OBCs, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the judiciary and in the private sector. It made a U-turn on the issue of quota-within-quota for the marginalised sections within the reservation for women in the legislatures, supporting it unlike in 2010 when the women’s reservation bill piloted by the Manmohan Singh government did not have a sub-quota. And it also made a commitment to reform the quota for the economically weaker sections by bringing within its ambit the poor from the backward classes and the other marginalised sections.
It was in the Karnataka assembly elections that Congress leader Rahul Gandhi first gave the slogan of ‘Jitni Abadi, Utna Haq’ (proportionate reservation) and made the demand for a caste census. The slogan, a variation of similar slogans raised by socialist ideologue Ram Manohar Lohia and Bahujan Samaj Party founder Kanshi Ram, brought the Congress in sync with the Mandal Commission’s report, which had found virtue in proportionate reservation. More recently, both Rahul and former Congress president Sonia Gandhi, in the context of the women’s reservation bill, backed quota-within-quota in the legislation. “The Congress Working Committee recently passed a resolution for caste census, and the party had also announced at the Raipur session that once we form government at the Centre, we will carry out a caste census,” said Capt Ajay Singh Yadav, chairman of the Congress’s OBC department.
The OBCs were never a dedicated support base of the Congress in the Hindi heartland. The party won elections in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar based on the backing of upper castes, dalits and Muslims, losing those vote banks with the rise of the politics of social justice on the one hand and the hindutva-driven politics of the BJP on the other.
Opening gambit: Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar and Deputy Chief Minister Tejashwi Yadav with other leaders at an all party meeting on caste census | PTI
The Congress and its fellow travellers in the opposition alliance feel that in caste census and proportional representation, they have a powerful counter to the BJP’s winning formula of hindutva, welfare and caste combination. It is felt that the issue will help the opposition provide the people with an alternative vision for the elections. It is an issue that the opposition leaders believe will help them reach out to a population that is the largest bloc of voters. “Hindutva is a disputed term which is sought to be applied to the identity of the Hindu majority. We are not in opposition to Hindus. Caste census is not against Hindus,” said Samajwadi Party’s Rajya Sabha MP Javed Ali Khan. “It is better to look at it in terms of using caste awareness to counter the communalisation of society. And this is an effective way of countering divisive forces.”
The demand for caste-based census and proportionate reservation is also aimed at projecting the BJP, which has made its own outreach efforts towards the OBCs, as uncaring when it came to their interests. The effort of the opposition is to interrupt the BJP’s inroads into the OBC votes. In recent years, in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, for example, the BJP has developed a voter base that goes beyond upper castes and includes sections of OBCs and dalits. The BJP has registered remarkable success in garnering OBC votes and it has become a major component of its success story. With Modi, who belongs to the OBC community, at the helm, the BJP has worked hard to woo the backward classes. It has tied up with non-Yadav OBC political parties such as the Apna Dal and the Suheldev Bharatiya Samaj Party in Uttar Pradesh. There has been an increase in the OBC representation within the party, and 27 ministers at the Centre belong to OBCs. The government recently launched the Vishwakarma Yojana to provide financial assistance to artisans and craftsmen, most of whom are members of the OBC community.
“If the Prime Minister was a well wisher of OBCs, he would have carried out a caste census. Contrary to what he is saying, it will not divide the country but help in improving the lot of the marginalised and the poor,” said Yadav.
Interestingly, the BJP government’s initiative in 2019 to provide 10 per cent reservation to the upper caste youth under the economically weaker sections quota could have resulted in stirring up the OBC quota demands that were already simmering. The EWS quota, against which many petitions were filed in the Supreme Court, was upheld by the top court through a majority verdict of 3-2 in November 2022. It was a clear signal that the 50 per cent ceiling on reservations that the court had put on quota in the Indra Sawhney judgment was not etched in stone because the EWS quota took the reservation ambit beyond 50 per cent. “There are Brahmins, Vaishyas, Muslims and Christians who are counted as OBCs. OBC reservation is, in fact, the real economic reservation since it is based on social, economic, educational and political indicators,” said Mohan Gopal.
The caste survey carried out in Bihar, feel opposition leaders, has strengthened the demands for a caste census at the national level. “The Bihar assembly had passed a unanimous resolution favouring caste census, and Chief Minister Nitish Kumar had led a 11-member delegation to meet Prime Minister Narendra Modi in August 2021 to demand caste census. With the Centre not moving on the issue, the Bihar government undertook a caste head count at the state level,” said JD(U) chief spokesperson K.C. Tyagi.
The caste census figures bolster Nitish’s standing among the backward classes, especially the extremely backward castes that number around 36 per cent who he has carefully cultivated. It also gives the Mahagathbandhan in Bihar a seemingly unbeatable advantage. And the exercise queers the pitch for the BJP, which had together with Nitish done exceedingly well in the state.
There are voices from within the NDA that have also been demanding a caste census at the national level. Union Minister of State for Social Justice Ramdas Athawale has demanded it, and so have its OBC allies, like Om Prakash Rajbhar, who heads the Suheldev Bharatiya Samaj Party. Rajbhar called the Bihar headcount rushed and faulty, but said the state showed the way and that demands for a caste census would grow fiercer. “It will be asked in neighbouring Uttar Pradesh why a caste head count cannot be conducted in the state or why a national caste census cannot be carried out. Our party is a strong supporter of the idea that the population and socio-economic indicators of different communities should be ascertained, and those who are actually deserving of affirmative action should be given reservation,” said Rajbhar.
The BJP highlights the ruling dispensation’s initiatives targeted at the OBCs and accuses the opposition of politicisation of social justice issues. According to K. Laxman, who heads the BJP’s OBC Morcha, the BJP is still in favour of a caste census. “But there are technical and legal issues involved. OBCs are not a homogenous entity throughout the country. Vaishyas are counted as OBCs in Bihar but not so in other states. Brahmins are counted as OBCs in certain states. So how will these issues be reconciled in the national caste census? We need a thorough and scientific survey,” said Laxman.
For the BJP, the report of the Rohini Commission, which was set up in 2017 to sub-categorise OBCs, could help establish itself further among the non-dominant backward class sections that it has cultivated over the years. According to its findings, of the 2,633 OBCs in the Central list, a handful have garnered a substantial chunk of the benefits. The report was submitted to President Droupadi Murmu in August and its findings have not been made public yet. However, it is also felt that the implementation of the report could be a double-edged sword that would result in a backlash from the dominant OBC sections and consolidate the position of the parties espousing their cause.
Meanwhile, the BJP’s counter strategy also involves pointing out the religious aspect of the OBC quota in opposition-ruled states. For example, Hansraj Ahir, chairman of the National Commission for Backward Classes, has stated that Muslims have been included in the OBC list in West Bengal in a disproportionate manner. This is believed to be the reason why Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has reservations against making caste census one of the opposition alliance’s main talking points.
Not everyone is comfortable with it, but the caste cauldron has been stirred.
CASTE CENSUS: COMMISSIONS
Kaka Kalelkar Commission: Set up by the Union government in 1953, it submitted its report in 1955. Its recommendations included a caste-based census in 1961, treating all women as a class as backward and reservation of 70 per cent seats in all technical and professional institutions for backward classes.
Dr R Naganna Gowda Committee, Karnataka: It was set up in 1960 and gave its report in 1961. It suggested one set of backward communities for reservation in services and another set for grant of educational concessions. It suggested 50 per cent reservation in technical and professional institutions and 45 per cent in government services. The government order based on the recommendations, however, was struck down by the Supreme Court.
V K Vishwanathan Commission, Kerala: This was the first of the few commissions on OBCs set up in the state. It was set up in 1961 and gave its report in 1963. It recommended reserving 40 per cent seats in technical and professional colleges for OBC students and 10 per cent for SC/ST students.
B D Deshmukh Committee, Maharashtra: It was set up in 1961 and gave its report in 1964. It recommended that the backward classes should be grouped under four categories – Scheduled Castes and Neo Buddhas, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified and Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Communities. It suggested reservation in government services and educational institutions related to their percentage in the state.
Manohar Pershad Commission, Andhra Pradesh: Set up in 1968, it presented its report in 1970. It identified four different categories of OBCs and recommended reservations in both professional colleges and in government services.
J N Wazir Committee, Jammu and Kashmir: It was set up in 1969 and gave its report in 1970. Acting on the recommendations of the committee, 'The Jammu and Kashmir Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes (Reservation) Rules, 1970' were framed by the state government.
A N Sattanathan Commission, Tamil Nadu: It was set up in 1969 and gave its report in 1970. It recommended 33 per cent reservation in state government jobs and in educational institutions.
Mungeri Lal Commission, Bihar: Set up in 1971, it submitted its report in 1976. It identified 128 communities as backward and 94 of them further as most backward. It recommended 20 per cent reservation in government departments and 24 per cent in professional institutions.
L G Havanur Commission, Karnataka: It was set up in 1972 and gave its report in 1975. It relied on economic, residential and occupational factors in determining social backwardness of castes and communities and did not go solely by caste. It recommended 16 per cent reservation for backward communities in government vacancies and educational institutions, 10 per cent for backward castes and six per cent for backward tribes.
A R Bakshi Commission, Gujarat: Set up in 1972, it submitted its report in 1976. It listed 82 castes and communities as socially and educationally backward. It recommended 10 per cent reservation in government services and in professional institutions.
Chhedi Lal Sathi Commission on Most Backward Classes, Uttar Pradesh: It was set up in 1975 and gave its report in 1977. It recommended classification of backward classes into three categories and suggested reservation in government services and educational institutions under a separate quota.
Mandal Commission: It was set up by the Union government in 1978 and submitted its report in 1980. It pegged the population of OBCs at 52 per cent, but in accordance with the 50 per cent cap on quota, recommended 27 per cent reservation for the backward classes in government jobs and educational institutions.
Hukum Singh Committee, Uttar Pradesh: It was set up in 2001, and gave its report the same year. It analysed the representation of SCs, STs and OBCs in government jobs in the state. It found that the Jatavs had the maximum share of jobs in the SC category and the Yadavs occupied majority of the posts in the OBC category.
Justice Raghavendra Kumar Committee, Uttar Pradesh: It was set up in 2018 and submitted its report in the same year. It recommended a split in the 27 per cent quota for OBCs – seven per cent for backward classes, 11 per cent for more backward classes and nine per cent for most backward classes. As per the panel's report, there are 79 sub-castes under the OBC category, out of which nine are backward class, 37 are more backward class and 33 fall under most backward class.
Justice G Rohini Commission for Sub-Categorisation of OBCs: It was set up by the Union government in 2017 and submitted its report in August 2023. The Commission was entrusted with the task of studying the entries in the central list of OBCs and examining the extent of equitable distribution of benefits of reservation amongst the OBCs and working out a mechanism for sub-categorisation of OBCs.
QUOTA AND THE SUPREME COURT
State of Madras vs Champakam Dorairajan, 1951: This was the first major judgment on the issue of reservations. It ruled that the government order providing for quota in state-run institutions on the basis of caste was null and invalid.
M R Balaji vs State of Mysore, 1963: The state of Mysore had in 1962 reserved 68 per cent seats in educational institutions for backward classes. The court ruled that caste cannot be the sole criterion to determine backwardness, and reservation should be below 50 per cent.
T Devadasan vs Union of India, 1964: The court ruled that the seats that could not be filled in a year could not be added to the 50 per cent reservation in the next year.
State of Kerala vs N M Thomas, 1976: The government's decision to grant provisional promotions to SC/ST communities when not having necessary qualifications was challenged. The court, however, said the rule would ensure equality in representation. It also said the 50 per cent limit is not an absolute rule but a rule of caution.
Indra Sawhney vs Union of India, 1992: Reservations given as per the Mandal Commission's report were challenged. The court emphasised the 50 per cent limit. It prescribed 11 indicators to ascertain backwardness and said there should be no reservations in promotion.
R K Sabharwal vs State of Punjab, 1995: The court ruled that the reservation should be determined on the basis of number of posts in the cadre and not on the basis of vacancies.
Jagdish Lal vs State of Haryana, 1997: General category candidates challenged the promotion of SC/ST candidates who were junior to them. The court ruled that the seniority of the SC/ST candidates would depend on the date of their promotion.
Ashoka Kumar Thakur vs Union of India, 2008: The court upheld the 27 per cent reservation for OBCs in state-funded institutions. It emphasised that the creamy layer should be excluded from reservations for OBCs, but said the rule cannot apply to SCs and STs.
Dr Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil vs The Chief Minister, 2021: Reservation given to the Maratha community under Maharashtra's Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Act, 2018, was struck down by the court, which said the quota violated the 50 per cent limit as it did not qualify the test of exceptional circumstances.
Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India, 2022: Ten per cent quota for economically weaker sections introduced by the Union government was challenged in this case. The court upheld the constitutional validity of the constitutional amendment that provided for it by a majority verdict of 3:2.