AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN INDIA

Swapnil Barai
BASW III
Guide: Dr. Babasaheb Kazi

Paper Presented at,

Social Work Seminar II

School of Rural Development

Tata Institute of Social Sciences
Tuljapur-413601

Abstract
Affirmative action is a commonly used term. Affirmative actions and
strategies are aimed at creating conditions for all to participate effectively in
decision-making and realize civil, cultural, economic, political, and social rights
in all spheres of life on the basis of non-discrimination. Unfortunately it is the
most controversial issue in India at present. In India the term reservation is
often used synonymous to affirmative action. However, the reservation can be a
form or method of affirmative action but it is not affirmative action per se.
Reservations are part of much larger policy package. It comprises a series of
legislations, ameliorative programmes and preferential schemes, designed to
benefit the weaker sections of the Society. The anti-reservation movement of
May 2006 is only the most recent instance of the contentious affirmative action in
India. The most crucial question is how to decide which groups are sufficiently
disadvantaged to deserve special treatment. The emergence of affirmative action
in India though dated to the colonial rule is the outcome of efforts to remedy ageold inequalities of Caste system in Indian society at the adoption of the
Constitution. The affirmative action policy has two-fold objectives, firstly of
creating equality of opportunity and the other of reducing inequality in order to
build a just society. But the recent incidences of violence against the Dalits and
the anti-reservation movement question the very existence of affirmative action
policy of the Indian State. The heterogeneity of human beings and their
behaviour will hinder the existence of effective inequality, this will lead to the
iniquitous power relations in the society, and hence affirmative action is a tool for
the nation-state in order to achieve justice for its disadvantaged citizens.
This paper is an attempt to look into the justifications given
for affirmative action, affirmative action policy of India and the
discontent prevailing in the newer generation of Indian society
because of the preferential treatment policies adopted by the
Indian State so far. The paper also attempts, on a conceptual
basis, to give the features of a good policy design.

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN INDIA

Affirmative action is a commonly used term. Affirmative
actions and strategies are aimed at creating conditions for all to
participate effectively in decision-making and realize civil, cultural,
economic, political, and social rights in all spheres of life on the basis
of non-discrimination. Unfortunately it is the most controversial issue
in India at present. The anti-reservation movement of May 2006 is only
the most recent instance of the contentious affirmative action in India.
The emergence of affirmative action in India though dated to the
colonial rule is the outcome of efforts to remedy age-old inequalities of
Caste system in Indian society at the adoption of the Constitution. The
affirmative action policy has two-fold objectives, firstly of creating
equality of opportunity and the other of reducing inequality in order to
build a just society. But the recent incidences of violence against the
Dalits and the anti-reservation movement question the very existence
of affirmative action policy of the Indian State. This paper is an attempt
to look into the justifications given for affirmative action, affirmative
action policy of India and the discontent prevailing in the newer
generation of Indian society because of the preferential treatment
policies adopted by the Indian State so far. The paper also attempts,
on a conceptual basis, to give the features of a good policy design.
THE CONCEPT OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
The working definition given in the final report PREVENTION OF
DISCRIMINATION The concept and practice of affirmative action
submitted by Mr. Marc Bossuyt, Special Rapporteur, to the Subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights at the
United nations is as below:
Affirmative action is a coherent packet of measures, of a
temporary character, aimed specifically at correcting the
position of members of a target group in one or more aspects
of their social life, in order to obtain effective equality.1
Terms such as Preferential Treatment Policies or Reservations
or Positive Discrimination are often covered under the concept of
Affirmative Action. However, the above mentioned report has claimed
that the term Positive Discrimination makes no sense. It states that

Bossuyt , M, 2002, Prevention of Discrimination The Concept and Practice of

Affirmative Action, Commission on Human Rights, United Nations,pp.3.

In accordance with the new general practice of using the term discrimination
exclusively to designate arbitrary, unjust or illegitimate distinctions, the term
positive discrimination is a contradiction in terminis: either the distinction in question
is justified and legitimate, because not arbitrary, and cannot be called discrimination, or
the distinction in question is unjustified or illegitimate, because arbitrary, and should not
be labelled positive.

In India the term reservation is often used synonymous to

affirmative action. However, the reservation can be a form or method
of affirmative action but it is not affirmative action per se. Reservations
are part of much larger policy package. It comprises a series of
legislations, ameliorative programmes and preferential schemes,
designed to benefit the weaker sections of the Society. 2 Affirmative
action is always directed to a certain target group composed of
individuals who all have a characteristics in common on which their
membership in that group is based and who finds themselves in a
disadvantaged position. The most crucial question is how to decide
which groups are sufficiently disadvantaged to deserve special
treatment. The genuineness of the relationship between affirmative
action and compensation for past or societal discrimination depends on
the extent to which race, caste, socio-cultural background or gender is
indeed an indicator of the social evil which the affirmative action
programme is intended to remove and the extent to which taking race,
caste, ethnic background or gender into account is an appropriate
method of combating discrimination. It can occur that affirmative
action will benefit some people even though they themselves have not
been disadvantaged by past or societal discrimination.
The two-class theory poses the question of who truly benefits
from preferential policies. It appears that it is the most fortunate
segment of the groups, designated as beneficiaries who seem to get
the most out of affirmative action measures. In other words, the
beneficiaries of affirmative action programmes tend to be wealthier
and least deprived members of a group. This two-class theory may
result in the creation of yet another disadvantaged or discriminated
against minority within the majority. It is likely that affirmative action
programmes create new disadvantaged groups. Thus selecting and
defining the target group for affirmative action is a major problem.
JUSTIFICATIONS GIVEN FOR AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
The state has to justify its affirmative action policy vis--vis public
opinion The justifications given for the implementation of affirmative
action policies are concrete to some extent as well as controversial.
2

Sheth D.L., 1987, Reservations Policy Revisited, in Ed. By., Mahajan Gurpreet, 1998, Democracy,
Difference & Social Justice, New Delhi: Oxford India Paperbacks, pp.490.

The often justification given is to remedy or redress historical

injustices. Here the aim is to compensate for intentional or specific
discrimination in the past that still has repercussions today. Certain
disadvantaged groups have been subjected to discrimination for long
periods, which has put their descendants in an underprivileged position
because of, for instance poor education and training. Secondly, it is to
remedy social/structural discrimination. It is the fact that disparities
continue to exist in educational, social, economic and other status. This
indicates that the granting of equality for all before the law establishes
formal equality but is insufficient to address adequately practices in
society that leads to structural discrimination. In essence, the notion of
structural discrimination encompasses all kinds of measures,
procedures, actions or legal provisions which are, at face value neutral
as regards race, caste, sex, ethnicity, etc., but which adversely affect
disadvantaged groups disproportionately, without any objective
justification.
Thirdly it aims to create diversity or proportional group
representation Recently American critical race theorists have set out
another theoretical basis for affirmative action, namely that the
presence of racial and ethnic diversity within the academy and
workplace is a necessary component of a just society. Positive
Diversity seems to them a better approach in achieving compensatory
justice for racial and ethnic minorities, and they therefore argue that
diversity, as rationale for racial preferences needs to be separated
from affirmative action.
Fourth justification regards to the social utility arguments.
Proponents of affirmative action agree that a well-designed policy of
affirmative action would increase the well being of many people in
different ways. Affirmative action might result in better services to
disadvantaged groups, in the sense that professionals from a
disadvantaged group have a better understanding and knowledge of
problems affecting disadvantaged groups. Furthermore, when
members of disadvantaged groups occupy positions of power and
influence, the interests of all disadvantaged groups will be better
perceived and protected. Fair and visible representation of these
disadvantaged groups in various fields, such as employment or
education, would provide for better social and political effectiveness in
these fields.
Fifthly, the affirmative action aims at pre-empting social unrest.
Affirmative action programmes are actively used both to promote the
interests of underprivileged members of society and to balance
internal inequalities of economic and political power, with the hope of
pre-empting social unrest.

The sixth argument in favour of affirmative action comes from the

economists who argue that the elimination of discrimination against
socially disadvantaged groups will serve the efficiency and justice of
the socio-economic system. The working of the labour market can be
optimized if the present imperfections caused by the irrational
prejudices are corrected.
Lastly, it is argued that at the dawn of a new State, efforts are made
to create a more egalitarian and a common nationality to strengthen
its sovereignty. India is a example of this which got independence after
along period of colonisation.
FORMS OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
There are currently two dominating policy models that persist in
governments throughout the world. The first and most controversial
model is a direct quota system. Governments that have adopted these
policies, for example in India, Malaysia, and Sri Lanka, have imposed
aggressive quantized reservation systems, requiring a set number of
positions to be reserved for members of a disadvantaged class. Often
these reservations have expanded beyond the public sector, affecting
private enterprise. The second model calls for more subversive
policies. The affirmative action polices of the United States and Great
Britain fall within this model. US law prohibits the use of quotas or
reservations. Instead affirmative action policies encourage a holistic
approach when analyzing an individuals candidacy for a position.
Therefore, race should be considered along with several other factors;
the theory is that candidates will increase diversity while also
maintaining the same quality of work.
Besides this, the social security measures and welfare
programmes in a state are part of affirmative action policy to enhance
the living conditions of the socially and economically disadvantaged
citizens.
DEVELOPMENT OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN INDIA
In the Indian context, reservations were introduced during the
last decades of the 19th century at a time when the subcontinent could
be broadly divided according to two main forms of governance British
India and the 6000 princely states. Some of these states were
progressive and eager to modernize through the promotion of
education and industry and by maintaining unity among their own
people. Mysore in south India and Baroda and Kolhapur in Western
India took considerable interest in awakening and advancement of the

minorities and deprived sections of the society. It should not surprise

us then that the very first records of implementing reservation policies
are from these princely states.
India developed affirmative programmes as early as 1927, and was probably the first
in the world to create as specific constitutional provision authorizing affirmative action in
government employment3

The origins of affirmative action policies in India can be dated to

the British colonial period. Although these policies were never intended
to give the Indians power, the British did encourage groups within
Indian society to seek political representation. They perceived Indian
culture to be naturally divided by the religious, linguistic, and regional
variations within Indian society. Therefore the manifestation of
separate political representation for each group seemed reasonable.
The British had two primary motivations in encouraging the
different Indian factions and ethnic groups to seek separate political
representation. They wanted to protect their Indian political allies,
notably the Muslims, in order to re-solidify their weakening grip on
India. The second reason was to restrain the ambitions of the Indian
National Congress by creating internal dissension within the Indian
government. The British were in fear of the recent gain of strength of
the Indian National Congress. In creating disunity between competing
factions, this served to decrease the momentum of the Indian National
Congress to act as representatives of India.
The Morley-Minto reforms of 1909, the Montagu-Clemsford
reforms of 1919, and the Simon Commission tour in the later 1920s
were the initial attempts of the British to incorporate the Indians into
the political process and establish political representation for each
faction. These first policy reforms worked to increase Indian
involvement in general positions of power, allowing them partial input
into governing their own affairs. However, the Indian National Congress
was hesitant to cooperate with these reforms, realizing that they would
never lead to Indian autonomy. In response, the Indian National
Congress in the 1930s, attempting to weaken the British position
began to negotiate with untouchable leaders the terms of separate
political representation. The untouchables, agreeing to give up
separate electorates, were granted reserved seats within Congress.
This marks the beginning of reservation policies in India.
Reservation policies were further developed in the Round Table
Conferences (RTC) of the 1930s. These conferences were held to
discuss the role of Indians in government and to insure political
3

Cunningham, C.D. Affirmative Action Policies and Controversies

representation for each group. Present at the Conferences were

representatives from the British government and from the major and
minor Indian social and economic groups. The purpose of the
Conferences was to develop an Indian Constitution, however, the
Conferences only revealed the profound divisions present within Indian
Society.
The historical divisions present within India led to development
and expansion of Affirmative Action policies. The RTC brought to the
political forefront many of the issues affecting disadvantaged minority
groups in India, predominately focused around issues affecting the
untouchables. The Conferences resulted in a stalemate between the
Indian National Congress and the minority factions over separate
political representation or joint electorates. The solution to this
stalemate was the introduction of preferential treatment policies. The
Communal Award (1932) is credited with being Indias first affirmative
action policy. It gave Muslims and other minority groups separate
electorates. However, the untouchables received the greatest benefits.
They were granted voting rights, special electorates, and reserved
seats in Congress. These policies were maintained after Indian
independence, eventually being incorporated into the constitution.
They were expanded to include many different disadvantaged classes,
influencing government employment and higher education.
After the independence, a constitutional law, a federal system of
governance, guaranteed rights, Supreme Court with vast power
including power to declare statutes unconstitutional has been
established. We rely on our court to resolve most important public
controversies. Today, the Constitution of India provides a blueprint for
an egalitarian society. It envisages equality for all before the law in its
article 14. The Constitution is not based on the premise of hierarchy,
but on the premise of equality. However, we cannot just erase or
cancel out age-old inequalities simply by adopting new principles in a
Constitution. Thus the question of what else has to be done is
addressed by the affirmative action policy of India that is envisaged in
our Constitution. The objective of the affirmative action policy is to
reduce the level of inequality in a society, which has had a hierarchical
order over a very long period of time and to create equality of
opportunity on a material basis.
THE INDIAN CASE
The framers of the Indian Constitution envisaged democracy as
the tool for emancipation and thus we find principle of equality
enshrined in our Constitution. The Scheduled Castes were the victim of
the age-old inequalities that existed in the hierarchy of the Caste

system. The upper caste people controlled the resources of production

and continued exploitation of the lower caste people. With the
constitutional provisions the caste system and its evil practices have
been virtually demolished but the mentality of oppression continues in
the upper caste people and it gets manifested in the most brutal form
over the Lower caste people. The Scheduled Tribes of India were
isolated from the mainstream society under the dilemma of seclusion
or inclusion in the development process in the name of maintaining
tribal identity and culture. The SCs and STs both were denied the
fundamental rights since ages. They stood deprived of basic education,
health, housing and livelihood facilities. Thus, there came the
reservation policy in addition to the welfare programmes of the
government. The group-based reservation policies that are currently
being proposed for other backward classes (OBCs) in higher education
have their rationale in three basic premises. The first is that the groups
concerned are socially disadvantaged relative to other unreserved
groups in the population. Second, that disadvantage is most effectively
addressed by directing benefits towards groups rather than directly to
disadvantaged individuals and households. Lastly, that among
available group-based affirmative action policies, reservations are the
right choice. Physically Handicapped (PH) persons also enjoy the
reservation policy. Women have always faced the exploitation from the
male dominated Indian society over the ages. The 73 rd Constitutional
amendment provides them political reservation at local levels.
Reservation policy provides three major benefits, which are as under:

1) Political

Reservation: It means that a certain number of seats in

Parliament and in the state legislatures are reserved for members of
the scheduled castes and the scheduled tribes, roughly in
proportion to their strength in the population. Political reservation in
Parliament and in the state legislatures is only for the benefit of the
scheduled castes and the scheduled tribes, not for the other
backward classes. Political reservations are written into the
Constitution of India and the provisions reveal the ambivalence of
the makers of the Constitution as well as of policy makers in
contemporary India. The constitutional provisions for political
reservations for the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes are
mandatory. It was decided that this would apply only for ten years,
so they would last for a single decade. But since then the
Constitution has had to be amended every ten years to keep on
extending political reservations for the scheduled castes and the
scheduled tribes.

2) Job

Reservation: Job reservations apply mainly to government

appointments at union and state level and also to organizations,
which are substantially funded by the government. The provisions
for job reservation apply not only to the scheduled castes and the
scheduled tribes but also to the other backward classes. Over the
years there has been an extension of job reservations for the
benefit of the other backward classes. This has now become the
most contentious issue, whether the wholesale extension of job
reservations for the other backward classes accords with the spirit
of the Constitution or not. For job reservations, unlike political
reservations, the provisions are not mandatory; they are enabling
provisions. The Constitution says that the state may take such
measures as are necessary for the special benefit of the other
backward classes.

3) Reservation in Education: Reservation in education has proved to

be very contentious. The reservation in education is ensured for
SCs, STs, OBCs and PH persons. The reservation in education covers
not only the arts and science field but also extends to the medical
and engineering fields. Recently reservation in higher education is
extended to OBCs. The May-2006 anti-reservation movement was
the repercussion of this.
Reservations are not affirmative action per se, if we look at the
operation of overall package of affirmative action in India, we find
three policy goals. First, to remove social and religious disabilities of
certain specified groups suffering disabilities on account of their social
segregation and cultural isolation; namely the Scheduled Castes (SCs)
and the Scheduled Tribes (STs). Second, to facilitate and promote
equal participation with others, of all socially disabled and
disadvantaged groups in organized sectors of Indias economic and
political life. This is sought to be achieved through provisions for
preferential treatment in education, in government employment,
reservations of seats in parliament, state legislatures and local bodies
and through other ameliorative schemes designed to improve their life
chances. With exception of reservation in legislatures the other
preferential measures are not confined to SCs and STs; they also
extend to Other Backward Classes. Third to protect, if necessary
through legislative action and executive orders, all these groups, also
described in the Constitution as weaker sections of society, or simply,

the disadvantaged groups4, from all forms of social injustice and

exploitation.
Reservations, along with other measures of protection and
upliftment of the weaker sections of society, should thus be viewed as
an instrument of a larger social policy of the state addressed to
effective citizenship rights to the vast sections of the population who
have been historically deprived and marginalised.
In articulating these goals, the policy has acquired multifarious contents of which
reservation is one. Thus, we have a series of laws which aim at removing disabilities,
such as, the untouchability offences act of 1955, the subsequently amended and tightened
protection of civil rights act of 1976, the legislation to prevent the forced labour, the
amended criminal tribes act of 1952 removing the legal disabilities suffered by the so
called criminal tribes. We also have protective laws preventing alienation of tribal lands,
regulating money lending and providing debt relief and legal aid to the weaker sections.
Besides, there are schemes and programmes for land allotment, housing, scholarship,
subsidies, etc, aimed at providing physical security and promoting occupational mobility
of these groups. The five-year plans have a special feature in the form of tribal sub-plans
and scheduled caste components of plans. The most significant and now a controversial
aspect of the policy is however the provision of reservations. Although these provisions
are based on the same values and rationale that inform other parts of the policy package,
there impact is felt adversely and directly by those outside the beneficiary groups and that
too in the vital area of social mobility where the means of mobility are always scarce and
competition intense.5

India also has ratified:

1. The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Racial
Discrimination
2. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
3. The international Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
4. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against
Women

I have preferred to use term Disadvantaged Groups instead of the term

Backward Classes. Backward Classes, apparently, gives a meaning of groups
lagging and lacking behind in the society. However, there are fundamental reasons
for their backwardness and that is basically the socially disadvantaged-ness. Social
Advantage this term is meant to capture economic resources, parental education,
social status and networks, all of which influence the growth of individuals in present
day society, thus I refer to these groups sometimes as Socially Disadvantaged
Groups.

Sheth D.L., 1987, Reservations Policy Revisited, in Ed. By., Mahajan Gurpreet, 1998, Democracy,
Difference & Social Justice, New Delhi: Oxford India Paperbacks, pp.491.

Thus the Indian State is under obligation to promote and protect

the interests of the disadvantaged groups in Indian society.
DISCONTENT IN INDIA
Indias development has been lopsided. Even after the fiftyseven years of Independence the country could not enhance the
deprived status of the disadvantaged sections of the society to a
minimum standard level. They are still deprived of the basic facilities
to live a minimum good life with dignity. The Indian State has been
unsuccessful in implementing its social security measures effectively.
The welfare programmes and social security measures were all the
efforts to safeguard the interests of the disadvantaged groups in the
society. I find that all of these measures are not widely debated and
opposed. The ruling elites as well as the common mass never oppose
it. Definitely the power balance has to be maintained. But in case of
Reservation policy, one of the forms of affirmative action, we find
violent expressions. Let us discuss, why this could have happened.
Reservations in India have faced widespread opposition. This
opposition could be understood with the following few examples. The
government services are not meant for the servants but they are
meant for the society as a whole. Administration must have the
services of the best man available in the land and these may be found
in all communities. Or in case of education, the best interests of the
nation demand that the most intelligent and the most promising should
be trained to supply the needs of the nation. Now in this case persons
with preferential treatment are treated inferiors. The mentality of the
mass opposing the reservation is that the person appointed through
preferential treatment is inferior and inefficient in different aspects of
the work allotted to him. The students argue about the meritocracy,
but they do not take into consideration, the kind of background they
have lived in to make to their position of studies. A Dalit student has a
low IQ, because he has not got enough nutrition till the age of 10
years, which is necessary to develop the IQ. If we look thoroughly, we
will find that it is the society and the state, which is responsible for the
dire condition of a Dalit. I will certainly not accept the point of
meritocracy while opposing the reservation. Certainly the reservations
have been misused in all the areas particularly by the elites among the
disadvantaged.
Primary objective of the Reservation policy is to create equality
of opportunities on a material basis and elimination of unjust
inequalities, whereas the secondary objective is the responsibility of
ensuring efficiency for minimum unavoidable costs and minimizing
costs and maximizing potential benefits. The recent decision of the

Indian state to extend reservation for OBCs in the educational

institutions for higher education give rise to the voice of the mass,
particularly students, that questioned the very principle of justice and
equality. Also being a student, I myself am aware about the
malpractice and rampant corruption happening in the implementation
of the Reservation programmes. Thus today the reservation policy is
questioned at two levels. Firstly at the level of its principle and then at
its operational level.
Reservations have not performed well in the past five decades.
Despite the reservation, we find a few members of the disadvantaged
groups at the high profile jobs and representation at the higher level in
any field. The information sources of the state tell that there are just
7.02% members of the disadvantaged groups in Indian Administrative
and Indian Police Services. Only 7.24% members from the weaker
sections could be found in the Indian Foreign Services. if we take a look
at the teachers in 256 different universities under the University
Grants Commission, it is a surprising thing that only 2% are Dalits.
Out of the Professors at six Indian Institute of Technology (IITs), only
three are Dalits who have not taken benefits of reservation. Clearly the
provision of reservation is not enough. For reservations to improve the
life chances of the socially disadvantaged significantly, other
components of the affirmative action policy will have to show a much
higher operational efficiency. The 2006 data of the National Crime
Records Bureau show the number of atrocities against the Dalits are
increasing and the reason for this is that the FIR is not registered under
the atrocity act, 1989, but under IPC, thus the accused finds a way out.
The principles of social justice are compromised at all the level of the
implementation of the affirmative action programmes.
One of the inescapable dilemmas of the caste-based affirmative
action policies is that they cannot but help intensifying caste identities.
The debate then gets vitiated because it concentrates on the identities
rather than on the valid social reasons why those identities are used as
indicators of disadvantaged. Reservation has also intensified the caste
identity. Caste consciousness has increased enormously and
affirmative action has played a part in that by increasing and
intensifying caste consciousness. But, affirmative action alone cannot
be responsible. Political leaders have found caste a very easy basis for
mobilizing political support. That is the easiest and the laziest course of
action for a politician to take. Today the caste system has weakened
but the caste identity has intensified its position. It is admirable that
the socially disadvantaged people have used the tool of inequality to
seek equality. But today the affirmative action programmes has
become a political tool of mobilizing people during the elections and

secure the votes. The principle of secularism, social justice and

equality are under the threat
The extension of reservations to the other backward classes on such a large scale
has carried the policy of reservations so far that in many ways it threatens the more
general principle of equality of opportunity irrespective of caste, creed and community
which is also inscribed into the Constitution of India.6

. Even the reservation has given a different identity to the

socially disadvantaged ones Sarkar ke jamai. The affirmative
action programmes have helped in creating a middle class. Those who
got the benefits of affirmative action programme have continued to
climb up the rungs of the ladder. They are indeed not worried about
the people of their community. This has happened with the political
agitation of the disadvantaged groups. The disadvantaged groups
lacked the political leadership. Those who were the leaders took their
stand and raised their height to live a life of prestige and dignity. In
addition we could look at the patronage offered by these leaders, is to
the nearest and dearest one, thus excluding the people of their own
community. Already the democratic practice of politics in India has
been dismantled. It seems that the political position/representation/ in
national political parties seems hereditary.
Another aspect of inequality which relates to affirmative action, and that is the
creation of a new middle class in India.. It is not as if people rank each other only in
terms of caste. Occupation, education and income have become increasingly important in
Indian society. Now it is true that the different castes are not equally represented through
the entire hierarchy of occupations. The upper castes are more common in the superior
non-manual occupations. There is an over-representation of the upper castes in such
occupations. And there is an overwhelming over-representation of the lower castes in the
inferior, menial and manual occupations. Affirmative action has played a role in shaking
up this.7

Some backward class elites have gained political and/or

economic power based on reservation. However, a majority of the
backward classes is not living any differently than before. Their
subsistence is meager and rural lifestyles do not provide them with any
of the benefits. A distinct economic class system exists in within the
backward classes. Since economic status is not a test used,
undeserving people gain the advantages and the deserving ones are
Beteille, Andre, 2002, Caste, Inequality and Affirmative Action, International Institute
of labour Studies, Geneva, Switzerland.pp.8
7
Beteille, Andre, 2002, Caste, Inequality and Affirmative Action, International
Institute of labour Studies, Geneva, Switzerland, pp.9-10
6

still without a significant change in their situation. Many more tests in

addition to the economic status should be used to bring about change
in the situation of these groups.
The provision to extend the reservation in the private sector is
the upcoming issue. We have very strong constitutional provisions for
protecting property rights - the rights of the individual, and so on. I
think that this will meet very strong opposition in the private sector. In
the last four or five years the Indian Parliament has had before it a bill
on the reservation for women of 33 per cent of the total number of
parliamentary seats. There has been opposition to the reservation of
seats for women in Parliament. The arguments against reserving
Parliamentary seats for women have been put forward mainly by
leaders of the other backward classes. Their argument has been that
over the years they have struggled to establish a place for themselves
in politics. Through their efforts at mobilization and organization, they
have captured a large number of seats in Parliament. Now one-third of
those will be taken away and reserved for women. Who are the women
who will get these seats? Their argument is that women belonging to
the upper castes and the middle classes will corner these seats; they
agree to reservation for women, but they want quotas within the
quotas and there is a problem there.
The problem is that once you have quotas within quotas in Parliament, you will have to
have quotas, not only for backward caste women, but also for minority women. If you
have quotas for minority women, then you cannot deny quotas to Muslim women, and
that will reintroduce into the Constitution the very thing against which the nationalist
movement and the Constitution of India stood, that is, reservations on the basis of
religion.8

A crucial situation, which induces a disagreement, is how to

decide which group is sufficiently disadvantaged to deserve special
treatment. If one group is given the preferential treatment, the other
minority groups ask for the same. Thus, there is a danger of minorities
fighting within themselves for the sake of preferential treatments. This
has already begun. The recent violence between the Dalits and the
Muslims are examples of it. Quotas are not necessarily the best
solution to all affirmative action problems. The groups today have not
remained homogenous. A class within the class exists today. As
mentioned above there is a formation of new middle class in India. This
has been again supplemented with the considerable heterogeneity that
we could find on the basis of different indicators to determine their
status of disadvantaged-ness.

Ibid,pp.10

There appears to be considerable heterogeneity within the broad social groupings that
are currently used and differences in the extent to which groups that were traditionally
disadvantaged have managed to extract benefits from the state.9

Today the situation is different. Those groups to which we term

disadvantage groups, they are not equally disadvantaged within
themselves and hence there is a need to look in detail towards the
individuals candidacy while seeking the benefits from any preferential
treatment. New disadvantaged groups have emerged due to the
progress of Indias economy and its linkages with the world economy.
The dimensions and parameters of the social disadvantaged-ness
appear to be changed. Since the groups are not homogenous the
reservation policy should change from a group based quota system to
a better one. In this type of system there are chances that the people
living in a better condition and enjoying different benefits will benefit
first, thus excluding the needy ones. The above discussion makes us
clear that the affirmative action package in India may be contentious,
but it is the reservation policy, which is more controversial since now it
is questioned at the level of principle and its operation. Thus there is a
need for designing a better reservation policy that will avoid the
prevailing discontent against the preferential treatment.
TOWARDS A BETTER POLICY DESIGN
Discussing a better policy design of the entire affirmative action
policy in India is out of the purview of this paper and requires a much
bigger study. My focus is limited towards the reservation policy in
India. Mr. Yogendra Yadav and Mr. Satish Deshpande have put forward
the following features of a good reservation policy. These are as
follows:
1. Evidence based approach
2. Sensitivity to multiple dimensions of disadvantages, including but
not limited to caste,
3. Sensitivity to the inter-action effects of the different dimensions of
disadvantaged
4. Sensitive to degrees of relative disadvantage
By an evidence-based approach we mean a policy framework that is explicitly linked to
empirical information relating to disadvantage, usually but not necessarily of a macrostatistical kind. The major advantage of such an approach is that it highlights the
fundamental reasons why affirmative action is being undertaken namely, various sorts
of social and economic disadvantage. This helps to de-essentialise identity markers like
Somanathan, R, 2006, Assumptions and Arithmetic of Caste-based Reservations,
Econmic and
Political Weekly, June 17,2006,pp.2436.
9

caste or religion i.e, it provides a rational explanation why specific castes or

communities are entitled to compensatory discrimination and undermines attitudes that
treat such entitlements as a birthright. A second important advantage is that evidencebased approaches have a built-in flexibility they can adjust to and reflect changes in
patterns of relative disadvantage. The downside is that such approaches become data
dependent, and are vulnerable to the failings of the data sources, and to the reification of
data. However, the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages at present. Sensitivity to
multiple sources of disadvantage, to interaction effects and to degrees of disadvantage
all of these features are also data-dependent in practice if not in theory. Such sensitivity
can only be developed if there is some stable method of measuring things like interaction
effects and relative intensity of disadvantage. The virtues of these features are selfevident a more nuanced and comprehensive framework will lead to more precise
targeting and, other things being equal, will produce faster and better results. In short,
such approaches are not only more robust in ethical-moral terms but also in terms of
practical efficiency, i e, minimizing costs and maximizing benefits.10

They further argue that the disadvantage of such features is that

the policy design becomes much more complicated and the
institutional mechanisms involved can become fragile. Such policies
are also more difficult to monitor. But once again the benefits exceed
the costs. Besides this, from time to time the practice of creamskimming among the groups, minimum threshold eligibility for superspecialty professional courses have been the suggested measures to
make sure that the needy ones get the benefits of the reservation
package. Rajni Kothari has suggested that reservations should be
limited to a single generation alone so that others who are left out will
benefit. But this can be countered with the argument that the
mentality of oppression is not going to end with this and the secondary
objective of building a just society, then, takes a back seat.
More long-term measures also need to be thought about. The
government must ensure the generation of reliable data on caste and
other sources of disadvantage. The National Sample Survey
Organization (NSSO) or other independent organization can be
requested to conduct a nationwide survey of the social profile of higher
educational institutions and job holders in the organized sector, public
as well as private. Lack of such data is the biggest obstacle blocking
the transition towards more robust and fine-tuned policy making in the
future. Second, it is time the government thought about the setting up
of something like a diversity and disadvantage commission as a
permanent statutory body to regularly monitor the diversity profile of
public institutions and to advise the government on improving it.
10

Yadav, Y & Deshpande, S, 2006, Redisigning Affirmative Action - Castes and

Benefits
in
Higher
Education,
Econmic
and
Political
Weekly,
June
17,2006,pp.2420-2421

In addition to this the Indian State must attempt at

removing occupations of manual scavenging, strengthening the
prevention of atrocity act, etc. The role of the nation state shall play a
proactive role, in the present day globalization era, by proper state
control to avoid exclusion of the poor in the market. The sate shall
strive to provide better health and educational facilities, implement
land reforms, enact right to work, ensure better minimum wages, etc.
Lastly, affirmative action has been widely used to correct the
positions of the weaker sections in a country. The present changing
context (global economic scenario and its impact), heterogeneity
among human beings, process of social interactions questions the
existence of effective equality in the society. The different variables of
inequality should be taken into account while formulating any plan so
that the reverse discrimination process does not take place. The
principle of equality and non-discrimination, the most basic principle of
human rights, applies to all rights, freedom, and guarantees, would
become meaningless if measures which clearly and manifestly deprive
persons of any right or freedom or guarantee on the basis of a criteria
which is not relevant to the right or freedom in questions are justified
by labeling such measures as affirmative action.

References:

1. Yadav, Y & Deshpande, S, 2006, Redisigning Affirmative Action Castes and Benefits in Higher Education, Econmic and Political
Weekly, June 17,2006.

2. Somanathan,

R, 2006, Assumptions and Arithmetic of Castebased Reservations, Econmic and Political Weekly, June 17,2006.

3. Beteille,

Andre, 2002, Caste, Inequality and Affirmative Action,

International Institute of labour Studies, Geneva, Switzerland.

4. Affirmative Action: A Global Perspective, Global Rights.

5. Cunningham, C, D. 2003, Lessons on Affirmative Action
India,
The
Subcontinental
www.thesubcontinental.org).

(available

From
at

6. Bossuyt

, M, 2002, Prevention of Discrimination The Concept

and Practice of Affirmative Action, Commission on Human Rights,
United Nations.

7. Gupta,

A, 2006, Affirmative Action in Higher Education in India

and US: A Study in Contrasts, University of California, Berkeley.

8. Despande,

A, 2005, Affirmative Action in India and the United

States, Equity & Development-World Development Report 2006.

9. Connor,

Y, 2005, Preferential Treatment Policies: A Perspective

into Affirmative Action in India And the United States, SP.660:
Gender and Race, Work, & Public Policy.

10.Sen, A, 1995, Inequality Re-examined, Oxford India Paperbacks:

New Delhi.

11.Ed.by Ahmad, E, Dreze, J, Hills, J & Sen, A, 1999, Social Security

in Developing Countries, Oxford India Paperbacks: New Delhi.

12.Ed.

By Mahajan, G, 1998, Democracy, Difference & Social

Justice, Oxford University Press: New Delhi.

13.Bains,

R. S., 1994, Reservation Policy and Anti Reservationists,

B.R. Publishing Corporation: Delhi.

14.Rawls, J.,1973, A Theory of Justice, Oxford University Press: New

York.

15.Ed.

By., Mahajan Gurpreet, 1998, Democracy, Difference &

Social Justice, New Delhi: Oxford India Paperbacks