JANUARY 19, 2019
A Janus-faced Quota
The 10% quota for higher-caste EWSs discredits the moral foundation of the principle of social justice.
T
he legislation granting a 10% quota in employment and
education for higher-caste aspirants from the economi-
cally weaker sections (EWSs) was passed in both houses of
Parliament. This swift move on the part of the central government
is within the compelling context of the forthcoming 2019 Lok
Sabha general election, which is why most of the parties found
it politically inconvenient to oppose it. Although, some of them
did express their reservations about the way in which the legisla-
tion was introduced in Parliament. They opposed it on the grounds
that the government in power at the centre did not give enough
time for discussion on it before it was tabled in Parliament for
its final approval. Similarly, an objection was also raised about
the procedure that the government adopted in order to fix the
criteria for educational and economic backwardness. How has
the government arrived at the figure of 10%, without any proper
and thorough documentation by a duly constituted commis-
sion? Although the legislation suffers from these problems and
is awaiting clearance from the apex court, the 10% quota may,
at this point in time, deserve some reflection on the possible
gains that might flow from such a legislation.
If the Court assents to the legislation and it is implemented
by the government, it is expected to help the needy among the
higher castes. In some cases, it is also expected to eliminate the
desperation of those who, in the past, would resort to obtain-
ing fake Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) certifi-
cates that were used to seek entry into professional courses
under the SC/ST quota. The legislation is also expected to keep
savarna-caste aspirants from seeking adoption into SC/ST
families in order to procure SC/ST certificates. Such a legisla-
tion would help them not resort to such deceptive self-charac-
terisation. Ironically, the 10% quota can help these savarnas
retain their authentic caste identity. In this way, they can now
avoid facing humiliation in courts of law on account of being
exposed as fake caste certificate holders. The 10% quota is
expected to reinforce the urge among the higher castes to be a
part of the reservation fraternity, along with the SCs, STs, and
Other Backward Classes (OBCs).
Finally, and most importantly, the 10% quota will prevent
these higher castes from holding reservations responsible for
national disintegration and perpetuation of casteism, as they
widely believe. Any attempt to criticise reservations, which was
Economic & Political Weekly EPW JANUARY 19, 2019 vol lIV no 3
routinely done by members of the higher castes, would now
amount to self-inflicted moral injury.
Such an affirmation of this quota will likely make us ignore a
much larger problem that is associated with the legislation for
the savarnas or higher castes. The 10% quota is at variance with
the very normative basis of the reservation policy, which was
envisioned for the benefit of the SCs. It is needless to mention
that the potential beneficiaries of the legislation would benefit
from a 10% quota based purely on the economic criterion, that
is, without having had to experience being subjected to the
practices of untouchability, which originally served as the fun-
damental basis for providing the quota for the SCs. They have
received this quota without having had to face, as it were, the
civilisational violence resulting from imposed disabilities, such
as atrocities or social boycott. While these higher castes may
be disadvantaged by poverty, treating material poverty as the
sole basis for deciding the need for reservations would result in
the dilution of the original criterion on which the reservation
for SCs was based. The practice of untouchability and imposed
social disabilities are considered as important criteria for the
justification of a reservation quota for the SCs. Reservation for
SCs was thus defended even after untouchability was constitu-
tionally abolished, since the practice of untouchability continues
in many forms on the ground.
It is absolutely crucial to note that the reservation of seats or
fixed quotas for the SCs was considered to be necessary to rule
out the destructive influence of caste prejudice, which often
ends up stalling and deferring the implementation of these
very provisions. The primary aim of the provision of fixed quo-
tas was to rule out any foul play associated with caste prejudice
and retain the virtue of sincerity that was so necessary to pro-
duce an outcome where SCs/STs would actually benefit from
the quota. It is for this reason that affirmative action by itself
was considered to be inadequate in terms of tackling caste prej-
udice. Affirmative action, as we know, provides only equal
opportunity, and not equality of outcome. The Constitution
went beyond affirmative action to adopt a fixed quota.
In this wider normative context, it is necessary to question as
to what the normative compulsion is, such as the one men-
tioned above, that led the present government to introduce a
fixed 10% quota. What is the nature of prejudice that prompted
7
EDITORIALS

this government to enforce this mandatorily? Caste-based pre-
judice certainly is not what has prompted the bringing in of a
savarna quota.
Unfairness or an element of injustice is rooted in the practice
of untouchability, whereas pure economic backwardness is
rooted in the systemic inability to provide jobs to the savarnas.
The lack of opportunities is not due to untouchability, but due
to the inability of the state and the market to provide enough
jobs for the qualified and the needy. Several articles and claus-
es of the Constitution demarcate the SCs for reservations based
on their comprehensive backwardness, and not selective back-
wardness as is the case in the savarna reservations.

8 JANUARY 19, 2019 vol lIV no 3 EPW Economic & Political Weekly