Satisfying the Collective Conscience of Hindu Upper Castes: The Problematic Sub-classification of SC/ST Reservations

Nagpur, Maharashtra—What does the history of Irish Home Rule show? It is well-known that during the negotiations between the representatives of Ulster and Southern Ireland, Mr. Redmond, the representative of Southern Ireland, in order to bring Ulster into a Home Rule Constitution common to the whole of Ireland, said to the representatives of Ulster: "Ask for any political safeguards you like, and you shall have them." The Ulstermen's reply was, "Damn your safeguards; we don't want to be ruled by you on any terms." People who blame the minorities in India ought to consider what would have happened to the political aspirations of the majority if the minorities had taken the attitude that Ulster took (Babasaheb Ambedkar, 1936, Annihilation of Caste).

If one seriously examines the popular political narrative around reservations constructed by the Hindu upper caste, the illustration by Babasaheb Ambedkar takes us back to the origin of reservations in India—not as mere welfare measures but as core negotiations between the modern Indian state and Scheduled Castes as a minority. The question remains: Has the Indian state fulfilled this negotiation? No supporter of justice, observing the miserable condition of SCs and STs, would agree that the Indian state has done so.

Rightfully, one should question both the government and the judiciary: Has the Indian state failed to keep its democratic promise to its most marginalized?

Ironically, instead of asking why the majority of Dalits are landless, why only 9 percent of Dalits operate on agricultural land (Agricultural Census, 2015-2016), why only 4 percent of SC and ST families have a member in government jobs (The Socio-Economic and Caste Census 2011), why the Brahmin community alone monopolizes 48 percent of the national income and other upper-caste communities 45 percent above the national average income (The Wealth Inequality, Class, and Caste in India report for 1961-2012), why the number of unfilled posts in the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes reserved category in Central ministries has increased substantially over the years, why more than 50 percent of posts in the SC/ST category are lying vacant (Department of Personnel & Training), why more than 65% of corporate board members are from a single upper-caste group, and why SC/ST communities are over-represented in low-paying jobs and under-represented in high-paying ones in private sector employment (Azim Premji University, 2019)—the Supreme Court has issued a verdict based on some hypothetically leading or dominant SC communities which do not exist on any official paper or document.

Amusingly, not only does the present judgment by a seven-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud lack empirical evidence, but it also overpowers the constitutional arrangements in this case, where any changes in SC/ST reservation should be the prerogative of Parliament and not the judiciary.

Moreover, it is important to ask: while striking down the Maratha Reservation, the Supreme Court found no credible evidence to suggest that the Maratha community is socially or educationally backward; what evidence did the Supreme Court have to identify which communities within SCs are leading and which have been left behind? Can such a crucial decision regarding historically marginalized communities be made in the absence of any authentic evidence or studies? Doesn’t the present judgment exhibit more of a popular narrative of the upper caste against SC/ST reservation, which generally lacks evidence and is filled with anger and upper-caste anxiety?

In addition, the narrative around the sub-categorization of SC reservation is also part of vote bank politics of upper-caste-led political parties, which aim to corner the politically conscious SC communities who have historically challenged the supremacy of the upper castes. As a result, sub-categorization without a targeted approach or policy of providing basic necessities to the most backward communities among SCs remains mostly bad-faith politics, not just to break the ‘Scheduled Caste’ as a potent political-class category but also to punish those SC communities who stand against casteist and communal agendas of ruling upper-caste politics. The present judgment on sub-categorization seems to align well with such divisive politics of upper-caste or dominant castes as it doesn’t question how far sub-categorization helped the most backward Dalits where such measures were implemented, for instance in Punjab and Bihar.

What is even more surprising in the present judgment is Justice BR Gavai's comment that “the State must come up with a policy to identify the creamy layer among SC communities and take them out of the fold of affirmative action,” which echoes the popular contempt of the upper caste against SC/ST/OBC reservations and was welcomed by the other judges. However, no judge asked what the percentage of the creamy layer within SCs is and if economically mobile SCs face caste discrimination in job appointments or university admissions.

Existing studies on caste and caste-based discrimination in jobs, education, and even in politics show that irrespective of economic position, SCs face discrimination by the upper caste. If one studies cases of caste discrimination in promotions and the suicides of SC students in university spaces like IITs, it becomes clear that it is not economic position but caste identity that still matters in so-called modern institutions. It would have been much appreciated if Justice BR Gavai had commented on the demand for land distribution to landless SC communities. But sadly, such demands do not satisfy the ‘collective consciousness’ of the upper castes.

Lastly, the most important question we want to ask the seven-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud is in which sphere they want to ensure the so-called ‘true equality’ they talked about? As reserved government jobs are reduced to only about 3 percent due to rapid privatization and the commercialization of education becoming the new reality of India, will the Supreme Court ever go against the upper-caste collective consciousness and support reservations in the private sector for poor SC-ST communities? In Justice BR Gavai's words, will the Supreme Court ever ensure ‘true equality’ in India’s private sector, which has been monopolized by the upper castes?

-Dr. Rahul Sonpimple

(President of All India Independent Scheduled Caste Association)