Reservation in India

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article may
require cleanup to meet
Wikipedia's quality
standards. Please improve this
article if you can. (August 2008)
Reservation in Indian law provides for a
quota system whereby a percentage of posts
are reserved in employment in Government
and in the public sector units, and in all public
and private educational institutions, except in
the religious/ linguistic minority educational
institutions,in order to mitigate backwardness
of the socially and educationally backward
communities and the Scheduled Castes and
Tribes who do not have adequate
representation in these services and
institutions. The reservation policy is also
extended to the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes for representation in
theParliament of India. The central
government of India reserves 27% of higher
education[1], and individual states may
legislate further reservations. Reservation
cannot be exceeded
00000000000000.00000000%, as per the
rulings given by the supreme court[2], but
certain Indian states like Rajasthan have
proposed a 68 % reservation which includes a
14% reservation for forward castes.[3] A
number of cases challenging the validity of
such reservations provided by the states
pending before the apex court.

Caste and community profile of people below

the poverty line in India, as outlined in
the Sachar Report
Reservations are intended to increase the
social diversity in campuses and workplaces
by lowering the entry criteria for certain
identifiable groups that are grossly under-
represented in proportion to their numbers in
the general population. Caste is the most used
criteria to identify under-represented groups.
However there are other identifiable criteria
for under-representation—gender (women are
under represented), state of domicile (North
Eastern States, as Bihar and Uttar Pradesh are
under-represented), rural people, etc. -- as
revealed by the Government of India
sponsored National Family Health and
National Sample surveys.
The underlying theory is that the under-
representation of the identifiable groups is a
legacy of the Indian caste system. After India
gained independence, the Constitution of
India listed some erstwhile groups
as Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled
Tribes (ST). The framers of the Constitution
believed that, due to the caste system, SCs and
the STs were historically oppressed and
denied respect and equal opportunity in Indian
society and were thus under-represented in
nation-building activities. The Constitution
laid down 15% and 7.5% of vacancies to
government aided educational institutes and
for jobs in the government/public sector, as
reserved quota for the SC and ST candidates
respectively for a period of five years, after
which the situation was to be reviewed. This
period was routinely extended by the
succeeding governments.
Later, reservations were introduced for other
sections as well. The Supreme Court ruling
that reservations cannot exceed
00000000000000.00000000% (which it
judged would violate equal access guaranteed
by the Constitution) has put a cap on
reservations. However, there are state laws
that exceed this 00000000000000.00000000%
limit and these are under litigation in the
Supreme Court. For example, the caste-based
reservation fraction stands at 69% and is
applicable to about 87% of the population in
the state of Tamil Nadu (see section on Tamil
Nadu below).
Contents
[hide]
• 1 History of the practice
• 2 Reservations and Judiciary
• 3 Types of Reservation
○ 3.1 Caste based

○ 3.2 Management quota

 ○ 3.3 Religion based
○ 3.4 State of domiciles

○ 3.5 Undergraduate colleges

○ 3.6 Other criteria

• 4 Relaxations

• 5 Reservation policy in Tamil Nadu

○ 5.1 Historical perspective

○ 5.2 Present practice

○ 5.3 Timeline

• 6 Population data

• 7 Arguments

○ 7.1 Arguments offered by supporters of

reservation
○ 7.2 Arguments offered by anti-

reservationists
○ 7.3 Other notable suggestions

• 8 See also

• 9 References

• 10 External links

[edit]History of the practice

Main articles: Poona Pact, Communal
Award, 1946 Cabinet Mission to
India, Kalelkar Commission, Mandal
Commission, and 2006 Indian anti-
reservation protests
Reservations in favour of Backward Classes
(BCs) were introduced long before
Independence in a large area, comprising the
Presidency areas and the Princely States south
of the Vindhyas. Chatrapati Sahuji Maharaja,
Maharaja of Kolhapur in Maharashtra
introduced reservation in favour of backward
classes as early as 1902 to eradicate poverty
from amongst them and to give them their due
share in the State administration. The
notification of 1902 created
00000000000000.00000000% reservation in
services for backward classes/communities in
the State of Kolhapur. This notification is the
first Govt. Order providing for reservation for
the welfare of depressed classes in India.
The concept of untouchability was not
practiced uniformly throughout the country,
the identification of oppressed classes is not an
easy task. What is more, the practice of
segregation and untouchability prevailed more
in the southern parts of India and was more
diffused in Northern India. An additional
complexity is that there are certain castes/
communities, which are considered as
untouchables in one province but not in other
provinces. Some castes, based on traditional
occupations, find place in both Hindu and
non-Hindu communities. Listing of castes has
had a long history, starting from the earliest
period of our history with Manu. Medieval
chronicles contain description of communities
located in various parts of the country. During
the British colonial period, listings were
undertaken after 1806, on an extensive scale.
The process gathered momentum in course of
the censuses from 1881 to 1931.
The Backward Classes movement also first
gathered momentum in South India
particularly in Tamil Nadu. The continuous
efforts of some of the social reformers of the
country viz. Rettamalai srinivasa Paraiyar,
Ayothidas
Pandithar www.paraiyar.webs.com , Jyotiba
Phule, Babasaheb Ambedkar, Chhatrapati
Sahu ji Maharaj and others, completely
demolished the wall created by the upper
classes between them and the untouchables.
India is divided into many endogamous
groups, or castes and sub-castes, as a result of
centuries of practicing a form of social
hierarchy called the caste system. Proponents
of reservation policy says that the traditional
caste system, as it is practised, leads to
severe oppression and segregation of the lower
castes and limited their access to various
freedoms, including education. Caste,
according to ancient scriptures such as "Manu
Smriti", is "Varnasrama Dharma", which
translates to "offices given according to class
or occupation". "Varna" in Varnasrama (Varna
+ Ashrama)is not to be confused with the
same word meaning 'colour'. The practice of
caste in India followed this rule.

 1882 - Hunter

Commission appointed. Mahatma Jyotirao

Phule made a demand of free and
compulsory education for all along with
proportionate reservation/representation in
government jobs.
 1891-The demand for reservation of
government jobs was made as early as
 1891 with an agitation in the princely State
of Travancore against the recruitment of
non-natives into public service
overlooking qualified native people.
 1901-Reservations were introduced in

Maharashtra in the Princely State of

Kolhapur by Shahu Maharaj. Reservations
in the princely states of Baroda and
Mysore were already in force.
 1908-Reservations were introduced in
favour of a number of castes and
communities that had little share in the
administration by the British.
 1909- Provisions were made in

the Government of India Act 1909

 1919- Montagu-Chelmsford

Reforms introduced.
 1919 - Provisions were made in

the Government of India Act 1919

 1921-Madras Presidency introduces

Communal G O in which reservation of 44

per cent for non-Brahmins, 16 per cent for
Brahmins, 16 per cent for Muslims, 16 per
cent for Anglo-Indians/ Christians and
eight per cent for Scheduled Castes.
 1935-Indian national congress passes
resolution called Poona Pact to allocate
separate electoral constituencies for
depressed classes.
 1935 - Provisions in Government of India
Act 1935.
 1942-B.R.Ambedkar established the All
India Depressed Classes federation to
support the advancement of the scheduled
castes. He also demanded reservations for
the Scheduled castes in government
services and education.
 1946- 1946 Cabinet Mission to
India proposes proportionate
representation with several other
recommendations.
 1947-India obtained Independence. Dr.
Ambedkar was appointed chairman of the
drafting committee for Indian Constitution.
The Indian constitution prohibits
discrimination on the grounds only
ofreligion, race, caste, sex and place of
birth [4]. While providing equality of
opportunity for all citizens, the
constitution contains special clauses "for
 the advancement of any socially and
educationally backward classes of citizens
or for the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes"[4]. Separate
constituencies allocated to Scheduled
Castes and Tribes to ensure their political
representation for 10 years.(These were
subsequently extended for every 10 years
through constitutional amendments).
 1947-1950- Debates of the Constituent
Assembly.
 26/01/1950-The Constitution of India
came in force.
 1953-Kalelkar Commission was

established to assess the situation of the

socially and educationally backward class.
The report was accepted as far as
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
were concerned. The recommendations for
OBC's were rejected.
 1956-Schedules amended as per Kaka
Kalelkar report.
 1976-Schedules amended.
 1979-Mandal Commission was established

to assess the situation of the socially and

 educationally backward.[5] The
commission didn't have exact figures for a
sub-caste, known as the Other Backward
Class(OBC), and used the 1930[6] census
data, further classifying 1,257
communities as backward, to estimate the
OBC population at 52%.[6]
 1980-the commission submitted a report,
and recommended changes to the
existing quotas, increasing them from 22%
to 49.5%[5].As of 2006 number of castes in
Backward class list went up to 2297 which
is the increase of 60% from community list
prepared by Mandal commission.
 1990-Mandal commission
recommendations were implemented in
Government Jobs by Vishwanath Pratap
Singh. Student Organisations launched
nationwide agitations. Rajiv
Goswami Delhi university student
attempted self-immolation. Many students
followed suit.
 1991-Narasimha rao Government
introduced 10% separate reservation for
Poor Among Forward Castes.
 1992-Supreme court upheld reservations to
Other backward classes in Indira Sawhney
Case. Also see Reservations and Judiciary
section
 1995-Parliament by 77th Constitutional
amendment inserted Art 16(4) (A)
permitting reservation in promotions to the
Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes.
Later it was further amended to include
consequential seniority by 85th
amendment.
 1998-Central Government conducted large

nationwide survey for the first time to

estimate economical and educational status
of various social groups.. The
National Sample Survey puts the figure at
32%[3]. There is substantial debate over
the exact number of OBC's in India, with
census data compromised by partisan
politics. It is generally estimated to be
sizable, but lower than the figures quoted
by either the Mandal Commission or and
national Sample Survey[4].Mandal
commission has been criticised of
fabricating the data. National surveys
 indicated that status of OBC is comparable
to Forward castes in many areas.[5]
 2005 August 12 - The Supreme Court
delivered a unanimous judgement by 7
judges on August 12, 2005 in the case of
P.A. Inamdar & Ors. vs. State of
Maharashtra & Ors.declaring that the State
can't impose its reservation policy on
minority and non-minority unaided private
colleges, including professional colleges.
 2005-93rd Constitutional amendment
brought for ensuring reservations to other
backward classes and Scheduled castes
and Tribes in Private Educational
institutions. This effectively reversed the
2005 August Supreme Court judgement.
 2006-The Constitution Bench of the

Supreme Court in M.Nagraj & Ors Vs.

Union of India & Ors upheld the
constitutional validity of Art 16(4) (A),
16(4) (B) and proviso to Art 335.
 2006-Reservations introduced for Other
backward classes in Central Government
Educational Institutions. Total Reservation
 went up to 49.5%. Also See Recent
Development.
 2007-Supreme Court give stayed on OBC
reservation in Central Government
Educational Institutions.
 2008—The Supreme Court of India on

April 10, 2008, upheld the Government's

move for initiating 27% OBC quotas in
Government funded institutions. The Court
has categorically reiterated its prior stand
that "Creamy Layer" should be excluded
from the ambit of reservation policy. The
Supreme Court avoided answering the
question whether reservations can be made
in private institutions, stating that the
question will be decided only as and when
a law is made making reservations in
private institutions. The verdict produced
mixed reactions from supporting and
opposing quarters.
Several criteria to identify creamy layer has
been recommended, which are as follows:[7]
Those with family income above Rs 250,000 a
year should be in creamy layer, and excluded
from the reservation quota. Also, children of
doctors, engineers, chartered accountants,
actors, consultants, media professionals,
writers, bureaucrats, defence officers of
colonel and equivalent rank or higher, high
court and Supreme Court judges, all central
and state government Class A and B officials.
The court has requested Parliament to exclude
MPs’ and MLAs’ children, too.
[edit]Reservations and Judiciary
Indian Judiciary has pronounced some
Judgments upholding reservations and some
judgments for fine tuning its implementations.
Lot of judgments regarding reservations have
been modified subsequently by Indian
parliament through constitutional
amendments. Some judgments of Indian
judiciary has been flouted by state and central
Governments. Given below are the major
judgments given by Indian courts and its
implementation status[8][9]:
Yea Implementation
Judgement
r Details
1951 Court has 1st constitutional
pronounced that amendment (Art. 15
 caste based
reservations as
per Communal
Awardviolates
Article 15(1). (4)) introduced to
make judgement
(State of Madras
invalid.
Vs. Smt.
Champakam
Dorairanjan AIR
1951 SC 226)
1963 Court has put Almost all states
50% cap on except Tamil Nadu
reservations in (69%, Under 9th
M R Balaji v schedule) and
Mysore AIR 1963 Rajasthan (68%
SC 649 quota including 14%
for forward castes,
post gujjar violence
2008) has not
exceeded 50% limit.
Tamil Nadu
exceeded limit in
1980. Andhra
Pradesh tried to
 exceed limit in 2005
which was again
stalled by high court.
Supreme court in
Indira Sawhney
& Ors v. Union of
India. AIR 1993
SC 477 : 1992
Supp (3)SCC 217
Judgement
1992 upheld
implemented
Implementation
of separate
reservation for
other backward
classes in central
government jobs.
Ordered to All states except
exclude Creamy Tamil Nadu
layer of other implemented. Recent
backward classes Reservation bill for
from enjoying providing
reservation reservations to other
facilities. backward classes in
educational
 institutions also has
not excluded
Creamy layer in
some states. (Still
under the
consideration of
Standing
committee).
Ordered to
All states except
restrict
Tamil Nadu
reservations
followed.
within 50% limit.
Declared separate
reservations for
economically Judgement
poor among implemented
forward castes as
invalid.
In General Ashok Kumar
Manager, S. Rly. Gupta: Vidyasagar
v. Rangachari Gupta Vs State of
AIR 1962 SC 36, Uttar Pradesh. 1997
State of Punjab v. (5) SCC 201
Hiralal 1970(3)
SCC 567, Akhil 77th Constitution
Bharatiya Soshit amendment (Art
Karamchari 16(4 A) & (16 4B)
Sangh (Railway) introduced to make
v. Union of India judgement as
(1981) 1 SCC 246 invalid. M. Nagraj &
it was held that Ors v. Union of
Reservation of India and Ors. AIR
appointments or 2007 SC 71 held the
posts under amendments
Article 16(4) constitutional. 1. Art.
included 16(4)(A) and 16(4)
promotions. This (B) flow from Art.
was overruled in 16(4). Those
Indira Sawhney constitutional
& Ors v. Union of amendments do not
India. AIR 1993 alter structure of Art.
SC 477 : 1992 16(4). 2.
Supp (3) SCC Backwardness and
217 and held that inadequacy of
Reservations representation are
cannot be applied the
in promotions. controlling/compelli
Union of India Vs ng reasons for the
Varpal Singh AIR state to provide
1996 SC 448, reservations keeping
Ajitsingh Januja in mind the overall
& Ors Vs State of efficiencies of state
Punjab AIR 1996 administration. 3.
SC 1189, Government has to
Ajitsingh Januja apply cadre strength
& Ors Vs State of as a unit in the
Punjab & Ors operation of the
AIR 1999 SC roaster in order to
3471, ascertain whether a
M.G.Badappanav given class/group is
ar Vs State of adequately
Karnataka 2001 represented in the
(2) SCC 666. service. Roaster has
to be post specific
with inbuilt concept
of replacement and
not vacancy based.
4. If any authority
thinks that for
ensuring adequate
representation of
backward class or
category, it is
necessary to provide
for direct
recruitment therein,
it shall be open to do
so. 5. Backlog
vacancies to be
treated as a distinct
group and are
excluded from the
ceiling limit of 50%.
6. If a member from
reserved category
gets selected in
general category, his
selection will not be
counted against the
quota limit provided
to his class and
reserved category
candidates are
entitled to compete
for the general
category post. 7. The
reserved candidates
are entitled to
compete with the
general candidates
for promotion to the
general post in their
own right. On their
selection, they are to
be adjusted in the
general post as per
the roster and the
reserved candidates
should be adjusted in
the points earmarked
in the roster to the
reserved candidates.
8. Each post gets
marked for the
particular category
of candidate to be
appointed against it
and any subsequent
vacancy has to be
filled by that
category alone
(replacement
theory). R K
Sabharwal Vs St of
 Punjab AIR 1995 SC
1371 : (1995) 2 SCC
745.
In Union of India By 85th Constitution
Vs Varpal Singh amended
AIR 1996 SC 448 Consequential
and Seniority was
Ajitsingh Januja inserted in Art 16 (4)
& Ors Vs State of (A) to make the
Punjab AIR 1996 judgement invalid.
SC 1189 it was M. Nagraj & Ors v.
held that a roster Union of India and
point promotees Ors. AIR 2007 SC
getting the benefit 71 held the
of accelerated amendments
promotion would constitutional.
not get Jagdish Lal and
consequential others v. State of
seniority and the Haryana and Others
seniority between (1997) 6 SCC 538 it
the reserved held that the date of
category continuous
candidates and officiation has to be
general taken into account
candidates in and if so, the roster-
promoted point promotees
category shall be were entitled to the
governed by their benefit of continuous
panel position. officiation.
This was
overruled in
Jagdish Lal and
others v. State of
Haryana and
Others (1997) 6
SCC 538 it held
that the date of
continuous
officiation has to
be taken into
account and if so,
the roster- point
promotees were
entitled to the
benefit of
continuous
officiation.
Ajitsingh Januja
& Ors Vs State of
Punjab & Ors
AIR 1999 SC
3471 overruled
Jagdish Lal M G
Badappanvar Vs
St of Karnataka
2001(2) SCC
666 : AIR 2001
SC 260 held that
roster promotions
were meant only
for the limited
purpose of due
representation of
backward classes
at various levels
of service and
therefore, such
roster promotions
did not confer
consequential
seniority to the
roster point
promotee.
 S. Vinodkumar By the Constitution
Vs. Union of (82nd) Amendment
India 1996 6 SCC Act a proviso was
580 held that inserted at the end of
relaxation of Art 335.
qualifying marks
M. Nagraj & Ors v.
and standard of
Union of India and
evaluation in
Ors. AIR 2007 SC
matters of
71 held the
reservation in
amendments
promotion was
constitutional.
not permissible
1994 Supreme court Tamilnadu
advised Reservations put
Tamilnadu to under 9th Schedule
follow 50% limit of the constitution.
I.R. Coelho (Dead)
by LRS. Vs. State of
T.N. 2007 (2) SCC
1 : 2007 AIR(SC)
861 Held, Ninth
Schedule law has
already been upheld
by the court, it
would not be open to
challenge such law
again on the
principles declared
by this judgment.
However, if a law
held to be violative
of any rights in Part
III is subsequently
incorporated in the
Ninth Schedule after
24 April, 1973, such
a violation/infraction
shall be open to
challenge on the
ground that it
destroys or damages
the basic structure as
indicated in Article
21 read with Article
14, Article 19 and
the principles
underlying
thereunder. Action
taken and the
transctions finalized
 as a result of the
impugned Acts shall
not be open to
challenge.
2005 In Unni Krishnan, 93rd constitutional
J.P. & Ors. Vs. amendment
State of Andhra introduced Art 15(5).
Pradesh & Ors. Ashoka Kumar
(1993 (1) SCC Thakur vs. Union of
645), it was held India[10] 1.The
that right to Constitution
establish (Ninety-Third
educational Amendment) Act,
institutions can 2005 does not
neither be a trade violate the "basic
or business nor structure" of the
can it be a Constitution so far as
profession within it relates to the state
the meaning of maintained
Article 19(1)(g). institutions and
This was aided educational
overruled in institutions.
T.M.A.Pai Question whether
Foundation v. the Constitution
State of (Ninety-Third
Karnataka (2002) Amendment) Act,
8 SCC 481, 2005 would be
P.A.Inamdar v. constitutionally valid
State of or not so far as
Maharashtra 2005 "private unaided"
AIR(SC) 3226 educational
Supreme court institutions are
ruled that concerned, is left
reservations open to be decided
cannot be in an appropriate
enforced on case. 2."Creamy
Private Unaided layer" principle is
educational one of the
institutions. parameters to
identify backward
classes. Therefore,
principally, the
"Creamy layer"
principle cannot be
applied to STs and
SCs, as SCs and STs
are separate classes
by themselves. 3.
Preferably there
should be a review
after ten years to
take note of the
change of
circumstances. 4. A
mere graduation (not
technical graduation)
or professional
deemed to be
educationally
forward. 5. Principle
of exclusion
of Creamy
layer applicable to
OBC's. 6. The
Central Government
shall examine as to
the desirability of
fixing a cut off
marks in respect of
the candidates
belonging to the
Other Backward
Classes (OBCs)to
balance reservation
with other societal
interests and to
maintain standards
of excellence. This
would ensure quality
and merit would not
suffer. If any seats
remain vacant after
adopting such norms
they shall be filled
up by candidates
from general
categories. 7. So far
as determination of
backward classes is
concerned, a
Notification should
be issued by the
Union of India. This
can be done only
after exclusion of the
creamy layer for
which necessary data
must be obtained by
the Central
Government from
the State
Governments and
Union Territories.
Such Notification is
open to challenge on
the ground of
wrongful exclusion
or inclusion. Norms
must be fixed
keeping in view the
peculiar features in
different States and
Union Territories.
There has to be
proper identification
of Other Backward
Classes (OBCs.). For
identifying backward
classes, the
Commission set up
pursuant to the
directions of this
Court in Indra
Sawhney 1 has to
work more
effectively and not
merely decide
applications for
inclusion or
exclusion of castes.
8.The Parliament
should fix a deadline
by which time free
and compulsory
education will have
reached every child.
This must be done
within six months, as
the right to free and
compulsory
education is perhaps
the most important
of all the
fundamental rights
(Art.21 A). For
without education, it
becomes extremely
difficult to exercise
other fundamental
rights. 9.If material
is shown to the
Central Government
that the Institution
deserves to be
included in the
Schedule (institutes
which are excluded
from reservations) of
The Central
Educational
Institutions
(Reservation in
Admission) Act,
2006 (No. 5 of
2007), the Central
Government must
take an appropriate
decision on the basis
of materials placed
and on examining
the concerned issues
as to whether
Institution deserves
to be included in the
 Schedule of the said
act as provided in
Sec 4 of the said act.
10. Held that the
determination of
SEBCs is done not
solely based on caste
and hence, the
identification of
SEBCs is not
violative of Article
15(1) of the
Constitution.
Relevant Cases
1.See Arts 12, 14, 15, 16, 19, 335 of the
Constitution of India.
2.State of Madras Vs. Smt. Champakam
Dorairanjan AIR 1951 SC 226
3.General Manager, S. Rly v. Rangachari
AIR 1962 SC 36
4.M R Balaji v. State of Mysore AIR 1963
SC 649
5.T. Devadasan v Union AIR 1964 SC 179.
6.C. A. Rajendran v. Union of India AIR
1965 SC 507.
7.Chamaraja v Mysore AIR 1967 Mys 21
8.Barium Chemicals Ltd. Vs Company Law
Board AIR 1967 SC 295
9.P. Rajendran Vs. State of Madras AIR
1968 SC 1012
10.Triloki Nath Vs. State of Jammu and
Kashmir AIR 1969 SC 1
11.State of Punjab vs. Hira Lal 1970(3) SCC
567
12.State of A.P. Vs U.S.V. Balram AIR
1972 SC 1375
13.Kesavanand Bharti v St of Kerala AIR
1973 SC 1461
14.State of Kerala Vs N. M. Thomas AIR
1976 SC 490 : (1976) 2 SCC 310
15.Jayasree Vs. State of Kerala AIR 1976
SC 2381
16.Minerva Mills Ltd Vs Union (1980) 3
SCC 625 : AIR 1980 SC 1789
17.Ajay Hasia v Khalid Mujib AIR 1981 SC
487
18.Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karamchari
Sangh Vs Union (1981) 1 SCC 246
19.K. C. Vasant Kumar v. Karnataka AIR
1985 SC 1495
20.Comptroller & Auditor-General of India,
Gian Prakash Vs K. S. Jaggannathan
(1986) 2 SCC 679
21.Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs A. P. State
Electricity Board (1991) 3SCC 299
22.Indira Sawhney & Ors v. Union of India
AIR 1993 SC 477 : 1992 Supp (3) SCC
217
23.Unni Krishnan v. State of A.P. and Ors.
(1993 (1) SCC 645)
24.R K Sabharwal Vs St of Punjab AIR
1995 SC 1371 : (1995) 2 SCC 745
25.Union of India Vs Varpal Singh AIR
1996 SC 448
26.Ajitsingh Januja & Ors Vs State of
Punjab AIR 1996 SC 1189
27.Ashok Kumar Gupta: Vidyasagar Gupta
Vs State of Uttar Pradesh. 1997 (5) SCC
201
28.Jagdish Lal and others v. State of
Haryana and Others (1997) 6 SCC 538
29.Chander Pal & Ors Vs State of Haryana
(1997) 10 SCC 474
30.Post Graduate Institute of Medical
Education and Research, Chandigarh Vs.
Faculty Association 1998 AIR(SC) 1767 :
1998 (4) SCC 1
31.Ajitsingh Januja & Ors Vs State of
Punjab & Ors AIR 1999 SC 3471
32.Indira Sawhney Vs. Union of India. AIR
2000 SC 498
33.M G Badappanvar Vs St of Karnataka
2001(2) SCC 666 : AIR 2001 SC 260
34.T.M.A.Pai Foundation v. State of
Karnataka (2002) 8 SCC 481
35.NTR University of Health Science
Vijaywada v. G Babu Rajendra Prasad
(2003) 5 SCC 350
36.Islamic Academy of Education & Anr. v.
State of Karnataka & Ors. (2003) 6 SCC
697
37.Saurabh Chaudri & Ors. v. Union of
India & Ors. (2003) 11 SCC 146
 38.P.A.Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra
2005 AIR(SC) 3226
39.I.R. Coelho (Dead) by LRS. Vs. State of
T.N. 2007 (2) SCC 1 : 2007 AIR(SC) 861
40.M. Nagraj & Ors v. Union of India and
Ors. AIR 2007 SC 71
41.Ashok Kumara Thakur Vs Union of
India. 2008
[edit]Types of Reservation
Seats in educational institutions and jobs are
reserved based on a variety of criteria.
The quota system sets aside a proportion of all
possible positions for members of a specific
group. Those not belonging to the designated
communities can compete only for the
remaining positions, while members of the
designated communities can compete for all
positions (reserved and open). For example,
when 2 out of 10 clerical positions in railways
are reserved for ex-servicemen, those who
have served in the Army can compete both in
the General Category as well as in the specific
quota.
[edit]Caste based
Seats are reserved for Schedules Castes,
Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Castes
(based chiefly on caste at birth) in varying
ratio by the central government and state
government. This caste is decided based on
birth, and can never be changed. While a
person can change his religion, and his
economic status can fluctuate, the caste is
permanent. In central government funded
higher educTypes of Reservation Seats in
educational institutions and jobs are reserved
based on a variety of criteria. The quota
system sets aside a proportion of all possible
positions for members of a specific group.
Those not belonging to the designated
communities can compete only for the
remaining positions, while members of the
designated communities can compete for all
positions (reserved and open). For example,
when 2 out of 10 clerical positions in railways
are reserved for ex-servicemen, those who
have served in the Army can compete both in
the General Category as well as in the specific
quota.
In central government funded higher education
institutions, 22.5% of available seats are
reserved for Scheduled Caste (Dalit)and
Scheduled Tribe (Adivasi) students (15% for
SCs, 7.5% for STs). This reservation
percentage has been raised to 49.5%, by
including an additional 27% reservation for
OBCs [10]. In AIIMS 14% of seats are
reserved for SCs, 8% for STs. In addition,
SC/ST students with only 50% scores are
eligible. This ratio is followed even in
Parliament and all elections where few
constituencies are earmarked for those from
certain communities. In a few states like Tamil
Nadu, the percentage of reservation is 18% for
SCs and 1% for STs, being based on local
demographics. In Andhra Pradesh, 25% of
educational institutes and government jobs for
BCs, 15% for SCs, 6% for STs and 4% for
Muslims.
[edit]Management quota
Most controversial quota is the Management
quota according to the advocaters of Pro-caste
reservation people. This is so because it
violates all the arguments given by the anti
reservation people and still they don't seem to
ever protest against it. It reserves about 15-
50 % seats in private colleges for the students
who are decided by the college management's
own criteria. The criteria involves the colleges
own entrance exam or minimum %age of
10+2 legally.
[edit]Religion based
The Tamil Nadu government has allotted 3.5%
of seats each to Muslims and Christians,
thereby altering the OBC reservation to 23%
from 30% since it excludes persons belonging
to Other Backward Castes who are either
Muslims or Christians.[11] The government's
argument is that this sub-quota is based on the
backwardness of the religious communities
and not on the religions themselves.[11]
Andhra Pradesh's administration has
introduced a law enabling 4% reservations for
Muslims. This has been contested in
court. Kerala Public Service Commission has
a quota of 12% for Muslims. Religious
minority status educational institutes also have
50% reservation for their particular religions.
[edit]State of domiciles
With few exceptions, all jobs under state
government are reserved to those who are
domiciles under that government. In PEC
Chandigarh, earlier 80% of seats were
reserved for Chandigarh domiciles and now it
is 50%. Institutes like JIPMER have a policy
of reserving postgraduate seats for those who
completed their MBBS in JIPMER. AIIMS
used to reserve 33% of its 120 postgraduate
seats for the 40 undergraduate students
(meaning everyone who had completed MBBS
in AIIMS was assured a postgraduate seat,
which was judged illegal by a Court.
[edit]Undergraduate colleges
Institutes like JIPMER have a policy of
reserving postgraduate seats for those who
completed their MBBS in JIPMER. [AIIMS]
used to reserve 33% of its 120 postgraduate
seats for the 40 undergraduate students
(meaning everyone who had completed MBBS
in AIIMS was assured a postgraduate seat,
which was judged illegal by a Court.
[edit]Other criteria
Some reservations are also made for:
 Sons/Daughters/Grandsons/Grand daughters

of Freedom Fighters.
 Physically handicapped.
 Sports personalities.
 Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) have a small

fracton of reserved seats in educational

institutions. They have to pay more fees and
pay in foreign currency (Note : NRI
reservations were removed from IIT in
2003).
 Candidates sponsored by various
organizations.
 Those who have served in the armed

forces (ex-serviceman quota).

 Dependants of armed forces personnel killed

in action.
 Repatriates.
 Those born from inter-caste marriages.
 Reservation in special schools of Govt.
Undertakings /PSUs meant for the children
of their employees (eg. Army schools, PSU
schools, etc.).
 Paid pathway reservations in places of
worship (eg. Tirupathi Balaji Temple,
Tiruthani Murugan (Balaji) temple).
 Seat reservation for Senior citizens/ PH in
Public Bus transport.
[edit]Relaxations
In view of the fact that several of the top
undergraduate and graduate institutions in
India, such as the IITs, the IIMs are among the
most selective in the world, it is not surprising
that most reservation criteria are applied at the
stage of entrance examinations for these
institutions. Some of the criteria are relaxed
for reserved categories, while others are
completely eliminated. Examples include:
1.The minimum high school marks criteria
are relaxed for reserved seats.
2.Age
3.Fees, Hostel Room Rent etc
It is important to note, however, that the
criteria required to graduate from an
institution are never relaxed, although some
institutions provide reduced load programs
(such as the ones at IITs) to meet the special
needs of these students.
[edit]Reservation policy in Tamil Nadu
[edit]Historical perspective
The reservation system in Tamil Nadu is much
in contrast to the rest of India, not by the
nature of reservation but by its history.When
the first reservation protest hit New Delhi in
May 2006, a contrasting quiet serenity was
noticed in Chennai. Later, as the anti-
reservation lobby gained in visibility in Delhi,
Chennai saw quiet street protests demanding
reservation. Doctors in Chennai, including
doctors association for social equality(DASE)
were in the forefront expressing their support
for reservation in institutions of higher
education run by the Central government.
[edit]Present practice
At present, in day to day practice, reservation
works out to somewhat less than 69%,
depending on how many non-reserved
category students are admitted in the super-
numerary seats. If 100 seats are available,
first, two merit lists are drawn up without
considering community (reserved or
unreserved), one for 31 seats and a second for
50 seats, corresponding to 69% reservation
and 50% reservation respectively. Any non-
reserved category students placing in the 50
seat list and not in the 31 seat list are admitted
under super-numerary quota (i.e.) seats are
added to the 100 for these students. The 31
seat list is used as the non-reserved open
admission list and 69 seats are filled up using
the 69% reservation formula (30 seats obc, 20
seats mbc, 18 seats sc and 1 seat st). The
effective reservation percentage depends on
how many non-reserved category students
figure in the 50 list and not in the 31 list. At
one extreme, all 19 (added from 31 to make
the 50 list) may be non-reserved category
students, in which case the total reservation
works out to about 58%(69/119); this might
also be argued to be (69+19)/119 or 74% with
the 19% considered as a 'reservation' for non-
reserved category students! At the other
extreme, none of the 19 added to the 31 list
may be from the non-reserved category, in
which case no super-numerary seats are
created and reservation works out to be 69%
as mandated by the state law.
[edit]Timeline
Tamilnadu Reservations
Sourced from a Rediff.com new article[12].
1951
16% Reservation for SC/ST and 25%
Reservation for OBCs introduced. Total
Reservation Stood at 41%
1971
Sattanathan Commission recommended
Introduction of "Creamy Layer" and
altering Reservation percentage for
Backward Classes to 16% and separate
reservation of 17% to Most Backward
Classes (MBCs).
DMK Government increased OBC
reservation to 31% and Reservation for
SC/ST has been increased to 18%. Total
Reservation stood at 49%
1980
ADMK government excludes "Creamy
Layer" from OBC reservation benefits.
Income Limit for availing Reservation
benefit has been fixed at Rs 9000 Per
Annum. DMK and other Opposition
parties protested the decision.
Creamy Layer scheme withdrawn and
Reservation % for OBC has been
increased to 50%. Total Reservation Stood
at 68%
1989
Statewide Road Blockade Agitations were
launched by Vanniar Sangam (Parent
Body of Pattali Makkal Katchi) demanding
20% reservations in State Government and
2% Reservations in Central Government
exclusively for Vanniyar Caste.
DMK Government Split OBC reservations
as 2 Parts with 30% for OBC and 20% for
MBC. Separate Reservation of 1%
introduced for Scheduled Tribes. Total
Reservation percentage stood at 69%.
1992
Supreme Court, in Mandal Judgement,
reiterated that Reservation percentage
cannot exceed 50% and "Creamy Layer"
to be excluded from Reservation benefits.
1994
Court instructed Tamil Nadu Government
to follow 50% reservations in the case
filed by famous lawyer K. M. Vijayan on
behalf of VOICE Consumer
forum. Anandakrishnan, one of the
members ofOversight committee, and
then Anna University chairman announced
that 50% reservation will be followed. His
house was attacked.
69% Reservation was included in 9th
Schedule.
K. M. Vijayan was brutally attacked and
maimed while leaving to New Delhi to file
case in Supreme Court against inclusion of
69% reservation in 9th Schedule[13]
2006
Supreme Court asked Tamil Nadu
Government to exclude Creamy Layer
from Reservation benefits.
Main
articles: 2006
Indian anti-
reservation
protests and Res
ervation policy
in Indian
Institutes of
Technology
 May 2006
-August 2006
Anti Reservation Protests intensified in
many parts of India.[14][15][16]). Pro
reservationists claim protests were
intensified by media bias."[17] Tamil Nadu
stayed calm. This is attributed to low
percentage of Forward castes in Tamil
Nadu (13%) as against 36% in India.
Alternative systems of Affirmative Action
proposed by academics Prof. Purushottam
Agrawal of the Jawaharlal Nehru
University in the form of the Multiple
Index Related Affirmative Action
(MIRAA)
-http://www.sabrang.com/cc/archive/2006/
june06/report3.html and by Prof. Satish
Deshpande and Dr. Yogendra Yadav of the
Centre for the Study of Developing
Societies
-http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/22/stories
/2006052202261100.htm
Dr. Sam Pitroda, Chairperson of
the National Knowledge Commission [an
advisory body instituted by Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh] came out in opposition
to the proposed scheme to extend caste-
based reservations to OBCs in institutes of
Higher Education
(http://www.indiadaily.org/entry/sam-
pitroda-review-quota-policy/)
Dr. Pratab Bhanu Mehta, member-
convener of the National Knowledge
Commission resigns from his post in
protest against the policy of reservations
[Dr. Mehta's open letter of resignation
-http://www.indianexpress.com/story/4916
.html].
Indian Prime Minister appoints Oversight
committee headed by former chief minister
of Karnataka M. Veerappa Moily to
suggest ways for implementation of
reservations for Other Backward Classes
and to suggest measures for increasing
seats in educational institutions.
Oversight committee submits interim
report and suggests phased implementation
of reservations in central educational
institutions for other backward classes.[6]
OBC reservation bill introduced in the Lok
Sabha and referred to standing committee.
It has not excluded creamy layer (rich and
affluent amongst the other backward
classes) from enjoying reservation benefits
per supreme court judgement.[7]
Supreme court referred inclusion of 69%
reservation in Tamil Nadu in 9th schedule
to 9 member bench
Se
pt
em
be
r
20
06
-
20
07
Supreme court advised Tamil Nadu to
exclude creamy layer among Backward
classes from enjoying reservation
facilities.[8]
Supreme court observed that central
Government is trying to introduce quota
without adequate data.
Oversight committee submits final report.
Supreme court upheld constitutional
amendment for providing reservations in
promotions for Scheduled castes and
Tribes. It reiterated 50% limit and
exclusion of Creamy layer from enjoying
reservation benefits.[9]
Parliamentary standing committee
recommended preference for non creamy
layer (Poor among backwards) among
backward classes from enjoying
reservation benefits and comprehensive
population survey to identify real
backward people.[10]
Sachar committee submitted its report
regarding backwardness of Indian
Muslims. It made many recommendations
for uplifting Indian Muslims. It indicated
that current enrollment in educational
institutions of non Muslim OBC's is
almost equal to/close to their population. It
also recommended alternative
methodfor identifying real needy people.
[11]
Union cabinet meeting rejected
Parliamentary standing committee
recommendations and decided to bring
reservations bill by including creamy layer
(Super rich) among other backward
classes. Parliament passed OBC
Reservations bill through voice vote.[12]
AIIMS doctors started indefinite hunger
strike protesting against reservations law.
[13]
April 20
On 10 April 2008, the Supreme Court of

India upheld the law that provides for 27%

reservation for Other Backward Castes

(OBCs) in educational institutions

supported by the Central government,

while ruling that the creamy layer among

the OBCs should be excluded from the

quota.[18][19]
 Mylapore constituency MLA S V Sekar

demands 7% reservation for Brahmins. As

of today, Brahmins are a forward

community in TN.

[edit

Main articles: Reservation in Indian

law provides for a quota system whereby a
percentage of posts are reserved in
employment in Government and in the public
sector units, and in all public and private
educational institutions, except in the
religious/ linguistic minority educational
institutions,in order to mitigate backwardness
of the socially and educationally backward
communities and the Scheduled Castes and
Tribes who do not have adequate
representation in these services and
institutions. The reservation policy is also
extended to the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes for representation in
the Parliament of India. The central
government of India reserves 27% of higher
education[1], and individual states may
legislate further reservations. Reservation
cannot be exceeded 50%, as per the rulings
given by the supreme court[2], but certain
Indian states like Rajasthan have proposed a
68 % reservation which includes a 14%
reservation for forward castes.[3] A number
of cases challenging the validity of such
reservations provided by the states pending
before the apex court.Indian lawbackward
communitiesthe Scheduled Castes and
TribesParliament of India[1][2]Rajasthan[3]
Caste and community profile of people below
the poverty line in India, as outlined in
the Sachar ReportSachar Report
Reservations are intended to increase the
social diversity in campuses and workplaces
by lowering the entry criteria for certain
identifiable groups that are grossly under-
represented in proportion to their numbers in
the general population. Caste is the most used
criteria to identify under-represented groups.
However there are other identifiable criteria
for under-representation—gender (women are
under represented), state of domicile (North
Eastern States, as Bihar and Uttar Pradesh are
under-represented), rural people, etc. -- as
revealed by the Government of India
sponsored National Family Health and
National Sample surveys.
The underlying theory is that the under-
representation of the identifiable groups is a
legacy of the Indian caste system. After India
gained independence, the Constitution of
India listed some erstwhile groups
as Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled
Tribes (ST). The framers of the Constitution
believed that, due to the caste system, SCs and
the STs were historically oppressed and
denied respect and equal opportunity in Indian
society and were thus under-represented in
nation-building activities. The Constitution
laid down 15% and 7.5% of vacancies to
government aided educational institutes and
for jobs in the government/public sector, as
reserved quota for the SC and ST candidates
respectively for a period of five years, after
which the situation was to be reviewed. This
period was routinely extended by the
succeeding governments.Indian caste
systemConstitution of IndiaScheduled
CastesScheduled Tribes
Later, reservations were introduced for other
sections as well. The Supreme Court ruling
that reservations cannot exceed 50% (which it
judged would violate equal access guaranteed
by the Constitution) has put a cap on
reservations. However, there are state laws
that exceed this 50% limit and these are under
litigation in the Supreme Court. For example,
the caste-based reservation fraction stands at
69% and is applicable to about 87% of the
population in the state of Tamil Nadu (see
section on Tamil Nadu below).
Contents
[hide]hide
• 1 History of the practice

• 2 Reservations and Judiciary

• 3 Types of Reservation

○ 3.1 Caste based

○ 3.2 Management quota

○ 3.3 Religion based

○ 3.4 State of domiciles

○ 3.5 Undergraduate colleges

○ 3.6 Other criteria

• 4 Relaxations

• 5 Reservation policy in Tamil Nadu

○ 5.1 Historical perspective

○ 5.2 Present practice

 ○ 5.3 Timeline
• 6 Population data

• 7 Arguments

○ 7.1 Arguments offered by supporters of

reservation
○ 7.2 Arguments offered by anti-

reservationists
○ 7.3 Other notable suggestions

• 8 See also

• 9 References

• 10 External links

[edit]History of the practiceedit

Main articles: Poona Pact, Communal
Award, 1946 Cabinet Mission to
India, Kalelkar Commission, Mandal
Commission, and 2006 Indian anti-
reservation protestsPoona PactCommunal
Award1946 Cabinet Mission to IndiaKalelkar
CommissionMandal Commission2006 Indian
anti-reservation protests
Reservations in favour of Backward Classes
(BCs) was introduced long before
Independence in a large area, comprising the
Presidency areas and the Princely States south
of the Vindhyas. Chatrapati Sahuji Maharaj,
Maharaja of Kolhapur in Maharashtra
introduced reservation in favour of backward
classes as early as 1902 to eradicate poverty
from amongst them and to give them their due
share in the State administration. The
notification of 1902 created 50% reservation
in services for backward classes/communities
in the State of Kolhapur. This notification is
the first Govt. Order providing for reservation
for the welfare of depressed classes in India.
The concept of untouchability was not
practiced uniformly throughout the country,
the identification of oppressed classes is not an
easy task. What is more, the practice of
segregation and untouchability prevailed more
in the southern parts of India and was more
diffused in Northern India. An additional
complexity is that there are certain castes/
communities, which are considered as
untouchables in one province but not in other
provinces. Some castes, based on traditional
occupations, find place in both Hindu and
non-Hindu communities. Listing of castes has
had a long history, starting from the earliest
period of our history with Manu. Medieval
chronicles contain description of communities
located in various parts of the country. During
the British colonial period, listings were
undertaken after 1806, on an extensive scale.
The process gathered momentum in course of
the censuses from 1881 to 1931.
The Backward Classes movement also first
gathered momentum in South India
particularly in Tamil Nadu. The continuous
efforts of some of the social reformers of the
country viz. Rettamalai srinivasa Paraiyar,
Ayothidas
Pandithar www.paraiyar.webs.com , Jyotiba
Phule, Babasaheb Ambedkar, Chhatrapati
Sahu ji Maharaj and others, completely
demolished the wall created by the upper
classes between them and the
untouchables.Rettamalai srinivasa Paraiyar,
Ayothidas Panditharwww.paraiyar.webs.com
India is divided into many endogamous
groups, or castes and sub-castes, as a result of
centuries of practicing a form of social
hierarchy called the caste system. Proponents
of reservation policy says that the traditional
caste system, as it is practised, leads to
severe oppression and segregation of the lower
castes and limited their access to various
freedoms, including education. Caste,
according to ancient scriptures such as "Manu
Smriti", is "Varnasrama Dharma", which
translates to "offices given according to class
or occupation". "Varna" in Varnasrama (Varna
+ Ashrama)is not to be confused with the
same word meaning 'colour'. The practice of
caste in India followed this rule.endogamous
groupscastescaste
systemoppressionsegregationeducationManu
SmritiVarnasrama DharmaVarna

 1882 - Hunter

Commission appointed. Mahatma Jyotirao

Phule made a demand of free and
compulsory education for all along with
proportionate reservation/representation in
government jobs.Hunter
CommissionMahatma Jyotirao Phule
 1891-The demand for reservation of
government jobs was made as early as
1891 with an agitation in the princely State
 of Travancore against the recruitment of
non-natives into public service
overlooking qualified native people.
 1901-Reservations were introduced in

Maharashtra in the Princely State of

Kolhapur by Shahu Maharaj. Reservations
in the princely states of Baroda and
Mysore were already in force.Shahu
Maharaj
 1908-Reservations were introduced in
favour of a number of castes and
communities that had little share in the
administration by the British.
 1909- Provisions were made in

the Government of India Act

1909Government of India Act 1909
 1919- Montagu-Chelmsford

Reforms introduced.Montagu-Chelmsford
Reforms
 1919 - Provisions were made in

the Government of India Act

1919Government of India Act 1919
 1921-Madras Presidency introduces

Communal G O in which reservation of 44

per cent for non-Brahmins, 16 per cent for
 Brahmins, 16 per cent for Muslims, 16 per
cent for Anglo-Indians/ Christians and
eight per cent for Scheduled
Castes.Madras Presidency
 1935-Indian national congress passes
resolution called Poona Pact to allocate
separate electoral constituencies for
depressed classes.Indian national
congressPoona Pact
 1935 - Provisions in Government of India
Act 1935.Government of India Act 1935
 1942-B.R.Ambedkar established the All
India Depressed Classes federation to
support the advancement of the scheduled
castes. He also demanded reservations for
the Scheduled castes in government
services and education.B.R.Ambedkar
 1946- 1946 Cabinet Mission to
India proposes proportionate
representation with several other
recommendations.1946 Cabinet Mission to
India
 1947-India obtained Independence. Dr.
Ambedkar was appointed chairman of the
drafting committee for Indian Constitution.
 The Indian constitution prohibits
discrimination on the grounds only
of religion, race, caste, sex and place of
birth [4]. While providing equality of
opportunity for all citizens, the
constitution contains special clauses "for
the advancement of any socially and
educationally backward classes of citizens
or for the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes"[4]. Separate
constituencies allocated to Scheduled
Castes and Tribes to ensure their political
representation for 10 years.(These were
subsequently extended for every 10 years
through constitutional amendments).Indian
Constitutionreligionracecastesex[4]equality
of opportunity[4]Scheduled Castes and
Tribespolitical representationconstitutional
amendments
 1947-1950- Debates of the Constituent
Assembly.
 26/01/1950-The Constitution of India
came in force.
 1953-Kalelkar Commission was

established to assess the situation of the

 socially and educationally backward class.
The report was accepted as far as
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
were concerned. The recommendations for
OBC's were rejected.Kalelkar Commission
 1956-Schedules amended as per Kaka
Kalelkar report.
 1976-Schedules amended.
 1979-Mandal Commission was established

to assess the situation of the socially and

educationally backward.[5] The
commission didn't have exact figures for a
sub-caste, known as the Other Backward
Class(OBC), and used the 1930[6] census
data, further classifying 1,257
communities as backward, to estimate the
OBC population at 52%.[6]Mandal
Commission[5]Other Backward Class[6][6]
 1980-the commission submitted a report,

and recommended changes to the

existing quotas, increasing them from 22%
to 49.5%[5].As of 2006 number of castes
in Backward class list went up to 2297
which is the increase of 60% from
 community list prepared by Mandal
commission.quotas[5]
 1990-Mandal commission

recommendations were implemented in

Government Jobs by Vishwanath Pratap
Singh. Student Organisations launched
nationwide agitations. Rajiv
Goswami Delhi university student
attempted self-immolation. Many students
followed suit.Vishwanath Pratap
SinghRajiv GoswamiDelhi universityself-
immolation
 1991-Narasimha rao Government

introduced 10% separate reservation for

Poor Among Forward Castes.Narasimha
rao
 1992-Supreme court upheld reservations to
Other backward classes in Indira Sawhney
Case. Also see Reservations and Judiciary
section
 1995-Parliament by 77th Constitutional
amendment inserted Art 16(4) (A)
permitting reservation in promotions to the
Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes.
Later it was further amended to include
 consequential seniority by 85th
amendment.
 1998-Central Government conducted large

nationwide survey for the first time to

estimate economical and educational status
of various social groups.. The
National Sample Survey puts the figure at
32%[3]. There is substantial debate over
the exact number of OBC's in India, with
census data compromised by partisan
politics. It is generally estimated to be
sizable, but lower than the figures quoted
by either the Mandal Commission or and
national Sample Survey[4].Mandal
commission has been criticised of
fabricating the data. National surveys
indicated that status of OBC is comparable
to Forward castes in many areas.[5]Sample
Survey[3][4][5]
 2005 August 12 - The Supreme Court
delivered a unanimous judgement by 7
judges on August 12, 2005 in the case of
P.A. Inamdar & Ors. vs. State of
Maharashtra & Ors.declaring that the State
can't impose its reservation policy on
 minority and non-minority unaided private
colleges, including professional colleges.
 2005-93rd Constitutional amendment
brought for ensuring reservations to other
backward classes and Scheduled castes
and Tribes in Private Educational
institutions. This effectively reversed the
2005 August Supreme Court judgement.
 2006-The Constitution Bench of the
Supreme Court in M.Nagraj & Ors Vs.
Union of India & Ors upheld the
constitutional validity of Art 16(4) (A),
16(4) (B) and proviso to Art 335.
 2006-Reservations introduced for Other
backward classes in Central Government
Educational Institutions. Total Reservation
went up to 49.5%. Also See Recent
Development.
 2007-Supreme Court give stayed on OBC
reservation in Central Government
Educational Institutions.
 2008—The Supreme Court of India on
April 10, 2008, upheld the Government's
move for initiating 27% OBC quotas in
Government funded institutions. The Court
 has categorically reiterated its prior stand
that "Creamy Layer" should be excluded
from the ambit of reservation policy. The
Supreme Court avoided answering the
question whether reservations can be made
in private institutions, stating that the
question will be decided only as and when
a law is made making reservations in
private institutions. The verdict produced
mixed reactions from supporting and
opposing quarters.
Several criteria to identify creamy layer has
been recommended, which are as follows:[7][7]
Those with family income above Rs 250,000 a
year should be in creamy layer, and excluded
from the reservation quota. Also, children of
doctors, engineers, chartered accountants,
actors, consultants, media professionals,
writers, bureaucrats, defence officers of
colonel and equivalent rank or higher, high
court and Supreme Court judges, all central
and state government Class A and B officials.
The court has requested Parliament to exclude
MPs’ and MLAs’ children, too.
[edit]Reservations and Judiciaryedit
Indian Judiciary has pronounced some
Judgments upholding reservations and some
judgments for fine tuning its implementations.
Lot of judgments regarding reservations have
been modified subsequently by Indian
parliament through constitutional
amendments. Some judgments of Indian
judiciary has been flouted by state and central
Governments. Given below are the major
judgments given by Indian courts and its
implementation status[8][9]:[8][9]
Yea Implementation
Judgement
r Details
1951 Court has 1st constitutional
pronounced that amendment (Art. 15
caste based (4)) introduced to
reservations as make judgement
per Communal invalid.
Award violates
Article
15(1).Communal
Award
(State of Madras
Vs. Smt.
Champakam
 Dorairanjan AIR
1951 SC 226)
Almost all states
except Tamil Nadu
(69%, Under 9th
schedule) and
Rajasthan (68%
Court has put quota including 14%
50% cap on for forward castes,
reservations in post gujjar violence
1963 2008) has not
M R Balaji v
exceeded 50% limit.
Mysore AIR 1963
Tamil Nadu
SC 649
exceeded limit in
1980. Andhra
Pradesh tried to
exceed limit in 2005
which was again
stalled by high court.
1992 Supreme court in Judgement
Indira Sawhney implemented
& Ors v. Union of
India. AIR 1993
SC 477 : 1992
Supp (3)SCC 217
upheld
Implementation
of separate
reservation for
other backward
classes in central
government jobs.
All states except
Tamil Nadu
implemented. Recent
Reservation bill for
Ordered to providing
exclude Creamy reservations to other
layer of other backward classes in
backward classes educational
from enjoying institutions also has
reservation not excluded
facilities.Creamy Creamy layer in
layer some states. (Still
under the
consideration of
Standing
committee).
Ordered to
All states except
restrict
Tamil Nadu
reservations
followed.
within 50% limit.
Declared separate
reservations for
economically Judgement
poor among implemented
forward castes as
invalid.
In General Ashok Kumar
Manager, S. Rly. Gupta: Vidyasagar
v. Rangachari Gupta Vs State of
AIR 1962 SC 36, Uttar Pradesh. 1997
State of Punjab v. (5) SCC 201
Hiralal 1970(3) 77th Constitution
SCC 567, Akhil amendment (Art
Bharatiya Soshit 16(4 A) & (16 4B)
Karamchari introduced to make
Sangh (Railway) judgement as
v. Union of India invalid. M. Nagraj &
(1981) 1 SCC 246 Ors v. Union of
it was held that India and Ors. AIR
Reservation of 2007 SC 71 held the
appointments or amendments
posts under constitutional. 1. Art.
Article 16(4) 16(4)(A) and 16(4)
included (B) flow from Art.
promotions. This 16(4). Those
was overruled in constitutional
Indira Sawhney amendments do not
& Ors v. Union of alter structure of Art.
India. AIR 1993 16(4). 2.
SC 477 : 1992 Backwardness and
Supp (3) SCC inadequacy of
217 and held that representation are
Reservations the
cannot be applied controlling/compelli
in promotions. ng reasons for the
Union of India Vs state to provide
Varpal Singh AIR reservations keeping
1996 SC 448, in mind the overall
Ajitsingh Januja efficiencies of state
& Ors Vs State of administration. 3.
Punjab AIR 1996 Government has to
SC 1189, apply cadre strength
Ajitsingh Januja as a unit in the
& Ors Vs State of operation of the
Punjab & Ors roaster in order to
AIR 1999 SC ascertain whether a
3471, given class/group is
M.G.Badappanav adequately
ar Vs State of represented in the
Karnataka 2001 service. Roaster has
(2) SCC 666. to be post specific
with inbuilt concept
of replacement and
not vacancy based.
4. If any authority
thinks that for
ensuring adequate
representation of
backward class or
category, it is
necessary to provide
for direct
recruitment therein,
it shall be open to do
so. 5. Backlog
vacancies to be
treated as a distinct
group and are
excluded from the
ceiling limit of 50%.
6. If a member from
reserved category
gets selected in
general category, his
selection will not be
counted against the
quota limit provided
to his class and
reserved category
candidates are
entitled to compete
for the general
category post. 7. The
reserved candidates
are entitled to
compete with the
general candidates
for promotion to the
general post in their
own right. On their
selection, they are to
be adjusted in the
general post as per
the roster and the
reserved candidates
 should be adjusted in
the points earmarked
in the roster to the
reserved candidates.
8. Each post gets
marked for the
particular category
of candidate to be
appointed against it
and any subsequent
vacancy has to be
filled by that
category alone
(replacement
theory). R K
Sabharwal Vs St of
Punjab AIR 1995 SC
1371 : (1995) 2 SCC
745.
In Union of India By 85th Constitution
Vs Varpal Singh amended
AIR 1996 SC 448 Consequential
and Seniority was
Ajitsingh Januja inserted in Art 16 (4)
& Ors Vs State of (A) to make the
Punjab AIR 1996 judgement invalid.
SC 1189 it was M. Nagraj & Ors v.
held that a roster Union of India and
point promotees Ors. AIR 2007 SC
getting the benefit 71 held the
of accelerated amendments
promotion would constitutional.
not get Jagdish Lal and
consequential others v. State of
seniority and the Haryana and Others
seniority between (1997) 6 SCC 538 it
the reserved held that the date of
category continuous
candidates and officiation has to be
general taken into account
candidates in and if so, the roster-
promoted point promotees
category shall be were entitled to the
governed by their benefit of continuous
panel position. officiation.
This was
overruled in
Jagdish Lal and
others v. State of
Haryana and
Others (1997) 6
SCC 538 it held
that the date of
continuous
officiation has to
be taken into
account and if so,
the roster- point
promotees were
entitled to the
benefit of
continuous
officiation.
Ajitsingh Januja
& Ors Vs State of
Punjab & Ors
AIR 1999 SC
3471 overruled
Jagdish Lal M G
Badappanvar Vs
St of Karnataka
2001(2) SCC
666 : AIR 2001
SC 260 held that
roster promotions
were meant only
for the limited
purpose of due
representation of
backward classes
at various levels
of service and
therefore, such
roster promotions
did not confer
consequential
seniority to the
roster point
promotee.
S. Vinodkumar By the Constitution
Vs. Union of (82nd) Amendment
India 1996 6 SCC Act a proviso was
580 held that inserted at the end of
relaxation of Art 335.
qualifying marks M. Nagraj & Ors v.
and standard of Union of India and
evaluation in Ors. AIR 2007 SC
matters of 71 held the
 reservation in
amendments
promotion was
constitutional.
not permissible
1994 Supreme court Tamilnadu
advised Reservations put
Tamilnadu to under 9th Schedule
follow 50% limit of the constitution.
I.R. Coelho (Dead)
by LRS. Vs. State of
T.N. 2007 (2) SCC
1 : 2007 AIR(SC)
861 Held, Ninth
Schedule law has
already been upheld
by the court, it
would not be open to
challenge such law
again on the
principles declared
by this judgment.
However, if a law
held to be violative
of any rights in Part
III is subsequently
incorporated in the
 Ninth Schedule after
24 April, 1973, such
a violation/infraction
shall be open to
challenge on the
ground that it
destroys or damages
the basic structure as
indicated in Article
21 read with Article
14, Article 19 and
the principles
underlying
thereunder. Action
taken and the
transctions finalized
as a result of the
impugned Acts shall
not be open to
challenge.
2005 In Unni Krishnan, 93rd constitutional
J.P. & Ors. Vs. amendment
State of Andhra introduced Art 15(5).
Pradesh & Ors. Ashoka Kumar
(1993 (1) SCC Thakur vs. Union of
645), it was held India[10] 1.The
that right to Constitution
establish (Ninety-Third
educational Amendment) Act,
institutions can 2005 does not
neither be a trade violate the "basic
or business nor structure" of the
can it be a Constitution so far as
profession within it relates to the state
the meaning of maintained
Article 19(1)(g). institutions and
This was aided educational
overruled in institutions.
T.M.A.Pai Question whether
Foundation v. the Constitution
State of (Ninety-Third
Karnataka (2002) Amendment) Act,
8 SCC 481, 2005 would be
P.A.Inamdar v. constitutionally valid
State of or not so far as
Maharashtra 2005 "private unaided"
AIR(SC) 3226 educational
Supreme court institutions are
ruled that concerned, is left
reservations open to be decided
cannot be in an appropriate
enforced on case. 2."Creamy
Private Unaided layer" principle is
educational one of the
institutions. parameters to
identify backward
classes. Therefore,
principally, the
"Creamy layer"
principle cannot be
applied to STs and
SCs, as SCs and STs
are separate classes
by themselves. 3.
Preferably there
should be a review
after ten years to
take note of the
change of
circumstances. 4. A
mere graduation (not
technical graduation)
or professional
deemed to be
educationally
forward. 5. Principle
of exclusion
of Creamy
layer applicable to
OBC's. 6. The
Central Government
shall examine as to
the desirability of
fixing a cut off
marks in respect of
the candidates
belonging to the
Other Backward
Classes (OBCs)to
balance reservation
with other societal
interests and to
maintain standards
of excellence. This
would ensure quality
and merit would not
suffer. If any seats
remain vacant after
adopting such norms
they shall be filled
up by candidates
from general
categories. 7. So far
as determination of
backward classes is
concerned, a
Notification should
be issued by the
Union of India. This
can be done only
after exclusion of the
creamy layer for
which necessary data
must be obtained by
the Central
Government from
the State
Governments and
Union Territories.
Such Notification is
open to challenge on
the ground of
wrongful exclusion
or inclusion. Norms
must be fixed
keeping in view the
peculiar features in
different States and
Union Territories.
There has to be
proper identification
of Other Backward
Classes (OBCs.). For
identifying backward
classes, the
Commission set up
pursuant to the
directions of this
Court in Indra
Sawhney 1 has to
work more
effectively and not
merely decide
applications for
inclusion or
exclusion of castes.
8.The Parliament
should fix a deadline
by which time free
and compulsory
education will have
reached every child.
This must be done
within six months, as
the right to free and
compulsory
education is perhaps
the most important
of all the
fundamental rights
(Art.21 A). For
without education, it
becomes extremely
difficult to exercise
other fundamental
rights. 9.If material
is shown to the
Central Government
that the Institution
deserves to be
included in the
Schedule (institutes
which are excluded
from reservations) of
The Central
Educational
Institutions
(Reservation in
Admission) Act,
2006 (No. 5 of
2007), the Central
Government must
take an appropriate
decision on the basis
of materials placed
and on examining
the concerned issues
as to whether
Institution deserves
to be included in the
Schedule of the said
act as provided in
Sec 4 of the said act.
10. Held that the
determination of
SEBCs is done not
solely based on caste
and hence, the
identification of
 SEBCs is not
violative of Article
15(1) of the
Constitution.
[10]
Creamy
layerCreamy layer
Relevant Cases
1.See Arts 12, 14, 15, 16, 19, 335 of the
Constitution of India.
2.State of Madras Vs. Smt. Champakam
Dorairanjan AIR 1951 SC 226
3.General Manager, S. Rly v. Rangachari
AIR 1962 SC 36
4.M R Balaji v. State of Mysore AIR 1963
SC 649
5.T. Devadasan v Union AIR 1964 SC 179.
6.C. A. Rajendran v. Union of India AIR
1965 SC 507.
7.Chamaraja v Mysore AIR 1967 Mys 21
8.Barium Chemicals Ltd. Vs Company Law
Board AIR 1967 SC 295
9.P. Rajendran Vs. State of Madras AIR
1968 SC 1012
10.Triloki Nath Vs. State of Jammu and
Kashmir AIR 1969 SC 1
11.State of Punjab vs. Hira Lal 1970(3) SCC
567
12.State of A.P. Vs U.S.V. Balram AIR
1972 SC 1375
13.Kesavanand Bharti v St of Kerala AIR
1973 SC 1461
14.State of Kerala Vs N. M. Thomas AIR
1976 SC 490 : (1976) 2 SCC 310
15.Jayasree Vs. State of Kerala AIR 1976
SC 2381
16.Minerva Mills Ltd Vs Union (1980) 3
SCC 625 : AIR 1980 SC 1789
17.Ajay Hasia v Khalid Mujib AIR 1981 SC
487
18.Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karamchari
Sangh Vs Union (1981) 1 SCC 246
19.K. C. Vasant Kumar v. Karnataka AIR
1985 SC 1495
20.Comptroller & Auditor-General of India,
Gian Prakash Vs K. S. Jaggannathan
(1986) 2 SCC 679
21.Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs A. P. State
Electricity Board (1991) 3SCC 299
22.Indira Sawhney & Ors v. Union of India
AIR 1993 SC 477 : 1992 Supp (3) SCC
217
23.Unni Krishnan v. State of A.P. and Ors.
(1993 (1) SCC 645)
24.R K Sabharwal Vs St of Punjab AIR
1995 SC 1371 : (1995) 2 SCC 745
25.Union of India Vs Varpal Singh AIR
1996 SC 448
26.Ajitsingh Januja & Ors Vs State of
Punjab AIR 1996 SC 1189
27.Ashok Kumar Gupta: Vidyasagar Gupta
Vs State of Uttar Pradesh. 1997 (5) SCC
201
28.Jagdish Lal and others v. State of
Haryana and Others (1997) 6 SCC 538
29.Chander Pal & Ors Vs State of Haryana
(1997) 10 SCC 474
30.Post Graduate Institute of Medical
Education and Research, Chandigarh Vs.
Faculty Association 1998 AIR(SC) 1767 :
1998 (4) SCC 1
31.Ajitsingh Januja & Ors Vs State of
Punjab & Ors AIR 1999 SC 3471
32.Indira Sawhney Vs. Union of India. AIR
2000 SC 498
33.M G Badappanvar Vs St of Karnataka
2001(2) SCC 666 : AIR 2001 SC 260
34.T.M.A.Pai Foundation v. State of
Karnataka (2002) 8 SCC 481
35.NTR University of Health Science
Vijaywada v. G Babu Rajendra Prasad
(2003) 5 SCC 350
36.Islamic Academy of Education & Anr. v.
State of Karnataka & Ors. (2003) 6 SCC
697
37.Saurabh Chaudri & Ors. v. Union of
India & Ors. (2003) 11 SCC 146
38.P.A.Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra
2005 AIR(SC) 3226
39.I.R. Coelho (Dead) by LRS. Vs. State of
T.N. 2007 (2) SCC 1 : 2007 AIR(SC) 861
40.M. Nagraj & Ors v. Union of India and
Ors. AIR 2007 SC 71
41.Ashok Kumara Thakur Vs Union of
India. 2008
[edit]Types of Reservationedit
Seats in educational institutions and jobs are
reserved based on a variety of criteria.
The quota system sets aside a proportion of all
possible positions for members of a specific
group. Those not belonging to the designated
communities can compete only for the
remaining positions, while members of the
designated communities can compete for all
positions (reserved and open). For example,
when 2 out of 10 clerical positions in railways
are reserved for ex-servicemen, those who
have served in the Army can compete both in
the General Category as well as in the specific
quota.quota system
[edit]Caste basededit
Seats are reserved for Schedules Castes,
Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Castes
(based chiefly on caste at birth) in varying
ratio by the central government and state
government. This caste is decided based on
birth, and can never be changed. While a
person can change his religion, and his
economic status can fluctuate, the caste is
permanent. In central government funded
higher educTypes of Reservation Seats in
educational institutions and jobs are reserved
based on a variety of criteria. The quota
system sets aside a proportion of all possible
positions for members of a specific group.
Those not belonging to the designated
communities can compete only for the
remaining positions, while members of the
designated communities can compete for all
positions (reserved and open). For example,
when 2 out of 10 clerical positions in railways
are reserved for ex-servicemen, those who
have served in the Army can compete both in
the General Category as well as in the specific
quota.
In central government funded higher education
institutions, 22.5% of available seats are
reserved for Scheduled Caste (Dalit)and
Scheduled Tribe (Adivasi) students (15% for
SCs, 7.5% for STs). This reservation
percentage has been raised to 49.5%, by
including an additional 27% reservation for
OBCs [10]. In AIIMS 14% of seats are
reserved for SCs, 8% for STs. In addition,
SC/ST students with only 50% scores are
eligible. This ratio is followed even in
Parliament and all elections where few
constituencies are earmarked for those from
certain communities. In a few states like Tamil
Nadu, the percentage of reservation is 18% for
SCs and 1% for STs, being based on local
demographics. In Andhra Pradesh, 25% of
educational institutes and government jobs for
BCs, 15% for SCs, 6% for STs and 4% for
Muslims.
[edit]Management quotaedit
Most controversial quota is the Management
quota according to the advocaters of Pro-caste
reservation people. This is so because it
violates all the arguments given by the anti
reservation people and still they don't seem to
ever protest against it. It reserves about 15-
50 % seats in private colleges for the students
who are decided by the college management's
own criteria. The criteria involves the colleges
own entrance exam or minimum %age of
10+2 legally.
[edit]Religion basededit
The Tamil Nadu government has allotted 3.5%
of seats each to Muslims and Christians,
thereby altering the OBC reservation to 23%
from 30% since it excludes persons belonging
to Other Backward Castes who are either
Muslims or Christians.[11] The government's
argument is that this sub-quota is based on the
backwardness of the religious communities
and not on the religions themselves.[11]Tamil
Nadu[11][11]
Andhra PradeshKerala Public Service
Commission
[edit]State of domicilesedit
With few exceptions, all jobs under state
government are reserved to those who are
domiciles under that government. In PEC
Chandigarh, earlier 80% of seats were
reserved for Chandigarh domiciles and now it
is 50%. Institutes like JIPMER have a policy
of reserving postgraduate seats for those who
completed their MBBS in JIPMER. AIIMS
used to reserve 33% of its 120 postgraduate
seats for the 40 undergraduate students
(meaning everyone who had completed MBBS
in AIIMS was assured a postgraduate seat,
which was judged illegal by a Court.
[edit]Undergraduate collegesedit
Institutes like JIPMER have a policy of
reserving postgraduate seats for those who
completed their MBBS in JIPMER. [AIIMS]
used to reserve 33% of its 120 postgraduate
seats for the 40 undergraduate students
(meaning everyone who had completed MBBS
in AIIMS was assured a postgraduate seat,
which was judged illegal by a Court.JIPMER
[edit]Other criteriaedit
Some reservations are also made for:
 Sons/Daughters/Grandsons/Grand daughters

of Freedom Fighters.Freedom Fighters

 Physically handicapped

 Sports personalities.
 Non-Resident Indians

 Candidates sponsored by various

organizations.
 Those who have served in the armed

forces (ex-serviceman quota).armed forces

 Dependants of armed forces personnel killed

in action.armed forces
 Repatriates.
 Those born from inter-caste marriages.
 Reservation in special schools of Govt.
Undertakings /PSUs meant for the children
of their employees (eg. Army schools, PSU
schools, etc.).
 Paid pathway reservations in places of
worship (eg. Tirupathi Balaji Temple,
Tiruthani Murugan (Balaji) temple).
 Seat reservation for Senior citizens/ PH in
Public Bus transport.
[edit]Relaxationsedit
In view of the fact that several of the top
undergraduate and graduate institutions in
India, such as the IITs, the IIMs are among the
most selective in the world, it is not surprising
that most reservation criteria are applied at the
stage of entrance examinations for these
institutions. Some of the criteria are relaxed
for reserved categories, while others are
completely eliminated. Examples
include:IITsIIMs
1.The minimum high school marks criteria
are relaxed for reserved seats.
2.Age
3.Fees, Hostel Room Rent etc
It is important to note, however, that the
criteria required to graduate from an
institution are never relaxed, although some
institutions provide reduced load programs
(such as the ones at IITs) to meet the special
needs of these students.
[edit]Reservation policy in Tamil Naduedit
[edit]Historical perspectiveedit
The reservation system in Tamil Nadu is much
in contrast to the rest of India, not by the
nature of reservation but by its history.When
the first reservation protest hit New Delhi in
May 2006, a contrasting quiet serenity was
noticed in Chennai. Later, as the anti-
reservation lobby gained in visibility in Delhi,
Chennai saw quiet street protests demanding
reservation. Doctors in Chennai, including
doctors association for social equality(DASE)
were in the forefront expressing their support
for reservation in institutions of higher
education run by the Central
government.Tamil Nadu
[edit]Present practiceedit
At present, in day to day practice, reservation
works out to somewhat less than 69%,
depending on how many non-reserved
category students are admitted in the super-
numerary seats. If 100 seats are available,
first, two merit lists are drawn up without
considering community (reserved or
unreserved), one for 31 seats and a second for
50 seats, corresponding to 69% reservation
and 50% reservation respectively. Any non-
reserved category students placing in the 50
seat list and not in the 31 seat list are admitted
under super-numerary quota (i.e.) seats are
added to the 100 for these students. The 31
seat list is used as the non-reserved open
admission list and 69 seats are filled up using
the 69% reservation formula (30 seats obc, 20
seats mbc, 18 seats sc and 1 seat st). The
effective reservation percentage depends on
how many non-reserved category students
figure in the 50 list and not in the 31 list. At
one extreme, all 19 (added from 31 to make
the 50 list) may be non-reserved category
students, in which case the total reservation
works out to about 58%(69/119); this might
also be argued to be (69+19)/119 or 74% with
the 19% considered as a 'reservation' for non-
reserved category students! At the other
extreme, none of the 19 added to the 31 list
may be from the non-reserved category, in
which case no super-numerary seats are
created and reservation works out to be 69%
as mandated by the state law.
[edit]Timelineedit

Tamilnadu Reservations
Sourced from a Rediff.com new article[12].[12]
1951
16% Reservation for SC/ST and 25%
Reservation for OBCs introduced. Total
Reservation Stood at 41%OBCs
1971
Sattanathan Commission recommended
Introduction of "Creamy Layer" and
altering Reservation percentage for
Backward Classes to 16% and separate
reservation of 17% to Most Backward
Classes (MBCs).
DMK
 1980
ADMK
Creamy Layer scheme withdrawn and
Reservation % for OBC has been
increased to 50%. Total Reservation Stood
at 68%
1989
Statewide Road Blockade Agitations were
launched by Vanniar Sangam (Parent
Body of Pattali Makkal Katchi) demanding
20% reservations in State Government and
2% Reservations in Central Government
exclusively for Vanniyar Caste.Pattali
Makkal KatchiVanniyar
DMK Government Split OBC reservations
as 2 Parts with 30% for OBC and 20% for
MBC. Separate Reservation of 1%
introduced for Scheduled Tribes. Total
Reservation percentage stood at 69%.
1992
Supreme Court, in Mandal Judgement,
reiterated that Reservation percentage
cannot exceed 50% and "Creamy Layer"
to be excluded from Reservation benefits.
1994
Court instructed Tamil Nadu Government
to follow 50% reservations in the case
filed by famous lawyer K. M. Vijayan on
behalf of VOICE Consumer
forum. Anandakrishnan, one of the
members of Oversight committee, and
then Anna University chairman announced
that 50% reservation will be followed. His
house was attacked.K. M. VijayanVOICE
Consumer forumAnandakrishnanOversight
committeeAnna University
69% Reservation was included in 9th
Schedule.
K. M. Vijayan was brutally attacked and
maimed while leaving to New Delhi to file
case in Supreme Court against inclusion of
69% reservation in 9th Schedule[13]New
Delhi[13]
2006
Supreme Court asked Tamil Nadu
Government to exclude Creamy Layer
from Reservation benefits.
Main
articles: 2006
Indian anti-
reservation
 protests and Res
ervation policy
in Indian
Institutes of
Technology2006
Indian anti-
reservation
protestsReservat
ion policy in
Indian Institutes
of Technology
May 2006
-August 2006
Anti Reservation Protests intensified in
many parts of India.[14][15][16]). Pro
reservationists claim protests were
intensified by media bias."[17] Tamil
Nadu stayed calm. This is attributed to low
percentage of Forward castes in Tamil
Nadu (13%) as against 36% in India.[14][15]
[16][17]

Alternative systems of Affirmative Action

proposed by academics Prof. Purushottam
Agrawal of the Jawaharlal Nehru
University in the form of the Multiple
Index Related Affirmative Action
(MIRAA)
- http://www.sabrang.com/cc/archive/2006
/june06/report3.html and by Prof. Satish
Deshpande and Dr. Yogendra Yadav of the
Centre for the Study of Developing
Societies
- http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/22/storie
s/2006052202261100.htmJawaharlal
Nehru
UniversityMIRAAhttp://www.sabrang.co
m/cc/archive/2006/june06/report3.htmlhttp
://www.hindu.com/2006/05/22/stories/200
6052202261100.htm
Dr. Sam Pitroda, Chairperson of
the National Knowledge Commission [an
advisory body instituted by Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh] came out in opposition
to the proposed scheme to extend caste-
based reservations to OBCs in institutes of
Higher Education
(http://www.indiadaily.org/entry/sam-
pitroda-review-quota-policy/)Sam
PitrodaNational Knowledge
Commissionhttp://www.indiadaily.org/entr
y/sam-pitroda-review-quota-policy/
Dr. Pratab Bhanu Mehta, member-
convener of the National Knowledge
Commission resigns from his post in
protest against the policy of reservations
[Dr. Mehta's open letter of resignation
- http://www.indianexpress.com/story/491
6.html].http://www.indianexpress.com/stor
y/4916.html
Indian Prime Minister appoints Oversight
committee headed by former chief minister
of Karnataka M. Veerappa Moily to
suggest ways for implementation of
reservations for Other Backward Classes
and to suggest measures for increasing
seats in educational institutions.chief
minister of Karnataka
Oversight committee submits interim
report and suggests phased implementation
of reservations in central educational
institutions for other backward classes.[6]
[6]
OBC reservation bill introduced in the Lok
Sabha and referred to standing committee.
It has not excluded creamy layer (rich and
affluent amongst the other backward
classes) from enjoying reservation benefits
per supreme court judgement.[7]Lok
Sabha[7]
Supreme court referred inclusion of 69%
reservation in Tamil Nadu in 9th schedule
to 9 member bench
Se
pt
em
be
r
20
06
-
20
07
Supreme court advised Tamil Nadu to
exclude creamy layer among Backward
classes from enjoying reservation
facilities.[8][8]
Supreme court observed that central
Government is trying to introduce quota
without adequate data.
Oversight committee submits final report.
Supreme court upheld constitutional
amendment for providing reservations in
promotions for Scheduled castes and
Tribes. It reiterated 50% limit and
exclusion of Creamy layer from enjoying
reservation benefits.[9][9]
Parliamentary standing committee
recommended preference for non creamy
layer (Poor among backwards) among
backward classes from enjoying
reservation benefits and comprehensive
population survey to identify real
backward people.[10][10]
Sachar committee submitted its report
regarding backwardness of Indian
Muslims. It made many recommendations
for uplifting Indian Muslims. It indicated
that current enrollment in educational
institutions of non Muslim OBC's is
almost equal to/close to their population. It
also recommended alternative
methodfor identifying real needy people.
[11]alternative methodfor[11]
Union cabinet meeting rejected
Parliamentary standing committee
recommendations and decided to bring
reservations bill by including creamy layer
(Super rich) among other backward
classes. Parliament passed OBC
Reservations bill through voice vote.[12]
[12]
AIIMS doctors started indefinite hunger
strike protesting against reservations law.
[13]
April 20
On 10 April 2008, the Supreme Court of
India upheld the law that provides for 27%
reservation for Other Backward Castes
(OBCs) in educational institutions
supported by the Central government,
while ruling that the creamy layer among
the OBCs should be excluded from the
quota.[18][19]Supreme Court of
Indiacreamy layer[18][19]
Feb 200
Mylapore constituency MLA S V Sekar
demands 7% reservation for Brahmins. As
of today, Brahmins are a forward
community in TN.
[edit]Po
Main ar
Castes a
Backwa
 and For
CastesS
and Trib
Classes

**NFHS
only Hin
populati
populati
assumin
populati
proporti
populati
SC/ST
Only SC/ST population details are
collected in Indian census. The SC/ST
population is 24.4%.[20][20]
Other B
After 1931,caste data is not collected for
non SC/ST caste-groups in census. Mandal
commission estimated OBC population
based on 1931 census as 52%.There is an
ongoing controversy about the estimation
logic used by Mandal commission for
calculating OBC population. Famous
psephologist and researcher, Dr. Yogendra
Yadav of the CSDS [who is a known
votary of Affirmative Action] agrees that
there is no empirical basis to the Mandal
figure. According to him "It is a mythical
construct based on reducing the number of
SC/ST, Muslims and others and then
arriving at a number."
Nationa
2000 (N
estimate
the coun
defined
Other B
The pro
cent on
OBCs. A
1998 by
Statistic
proporti
as 29.8
surveys
by Over
final rep
Yadav.
used the
its final
populati
in NSS
other se
[14]
NSS 99
[edit]Ar
There ar
provide
oppositi
of the ar
are often
while ot
both sid
solution
accomm
[edit]Ar
supporte
 Reserv
necess
influe
popula
benefi
govern
mainta
reserv
legal a
by Gu
(Rajas
increa
 essent
India.
 Althou
do und
educa
Action
many
includ
Africa
was re
Unive
Action
benefi
privile
said th
institu
scores
whites
after g
advan
identic
classm
slightl
whites
institu
profes
 busine
becom
white
comm
[23]U
Africa
Unive
 Althou
do und
educa
Action
not ev
privile
repres
grow
in the
indust
Tamil
educa
it is ju
solutio
means
repres
under-
and th
on cam
 Althou
do und
educa
neede
justice
margi
underp
and th
Reserv
these
lead s
elimin
discrim
widely
especi
(about
popula
 Anti-r
a gros
drain
drain
the "w
rich v
assum
be a fr
must u
 drain
meani
nation
separa
a who
countr
reserv
enoug
drain
 There
reserv
meritr
meritr
withou
people
same
a secti
regard
we ca
Forwa
known
reserv
"merit
have o
proces
more
 becom
China
birth.
highly
man f
comes
which
instea
reserv
must b
fact th
collare
[edit]Ar
reservat
 Caste
perpet
in soc
weake
social
envisa
Reserv
narrow
 Alloca

of disc
contra
 to equ
ity
 The p
never
wides
audit.
reserv
entire
proper
benefi
60 yea
 Poor p
castes
or eco
rich p
caste.
 Many

Comm
suppo
reserv
Mand
the In
catego
Nation
2000,
 (32%
exclud
[24].M
 This p

has al
in bra
aggrav
gradua
start m
univer
educa
[edit]Ot
suggesti
The foll
have be
find a so
Suggest
Commi
 Sacha

Marks based on Merit : 60

Marks based on Household Income
(Irrespective of caste) : 13
Marks based on District in which person
studied(Rural/Urban & Region : 13
Marks based on Family occupation and
caste : 14
Total Marks : 100
The Sac
that OB
instituti
populati
Ministe
commit
recomm
not offe
suggesti
detected
situation
be denie
clearly a
justice[1
Suggest
Develop
 It has

an imp
Indian
gende
dispar
canno
 a child
schoo
societ
elite p
Some
system
which
exclus
a pers
contri
by Pro
Jawah
the M
Action
here: h
006/ju
Yogen
of the
Societ
[CSDS
e/2006
Suggest
 Reserv
on obj
 Emph
prima
group
educa
becom
 The n

the pr
(such
 Gover
plan to
 Gover

marria
of cas
[27][25
This is b
characte
endogam
providin
inter-ca
weaken
 Reserv
status
(But t
suffer
tycoon
 People
tax pa
reserv
reach
achiev
to this
people
injusti
 Using
data o
attainm
wealth
the na
this is
there a
people
then th
castes
runnin
and pr
withou
[edit]Se
 Dhang
 Nation
 Social
 Caste
[edit]Re
1. ^de Z
Caste,
Sociol
2. ^[1]

3. ^[2]

4. ^ a b C

India
5. ^ a b B

OBCs
India,
OBCs
6. ^ a b R

Other
and Po
Retrie
Backw
7. ^"New

8. ^www

9. ^India

cream
10. ^Supr
11. ^abV
forwa
forwa
12. ^Eval

13. ^http:

_4.htm
14. ^Anti

15. ^Nati

16. ^"Doc

IBN
17. ^The

Articl
18. ^SC u

out
19. ^Supr

20. ^"Pop

21. ^"36%

22. ^Infor

23. ^Stud

Cites
24. ^Quo

25. ^Stati
26. ^The
News
27. ^The

Welfa
[edit]Ex
 Why r
B. Raw
 The M
Sharm
 Radic
and th
Feb 20
 Radic
Reserv
Pattan
 Critics
quotas
 Anti R
AntiR
 Supre
 Reserv
 Anti R
 Comp
 Reserv
 South
 Reserv
 Exam
 Reserv
 Multip
(An A
 Reserv
propo
 Quest
 Reserv
faculty
 An Al
 Reserv
States
 UP in
privat
 Rangn
quota
 Reserv
only o
 Bull's
Categor
systemP
• article

• discus

• edit th

• history

navigati
 Main

 Conte

 Featur

 Curren

 Rando
 search
Top of Form

Bottom of Form
interacti
 About

 Comm

 Recen

 Conta

 Donat

 Help

toolbox
 What

 Relate

 Uploa

 Specia

 Printa

 Perma

 Cite th

 This
 Castes a
Backwa
and For

**NFHS
only Hin
populati
populati
assumin
populati
proporti
populati
SC/ST
Only SC/ST population details are
collected in Indian census. The SC/ST
population is 24.4%.[20]
Other B
After 1931,caste data is not collected for
non SC/ST caste-groups in census. Mandal
commission estimated OBC population
based on 1931 census as 52%.There is an
ongoing controversy about the estimation
logic used by Mandal commission for
calculating OBC population. Famous
psephologist and researcher, Dr. Yogendra
Yadav of the CSDS [who is a known
votary of Affirmative Action] agrees that
there is no empirical basis to the Mandal
figure. According to him "It is a mythical
construct based on reducing the number of
SC/ST, Muslims and others and then
arriving at a number."
Nationa
2000 (N
estimate
the coun
defined
Other B
The pro
cent on
OBCs. A
1998 by
Statistic
proporti
as 29.8
surveys
by Over
final rep
Yadav.
used the
its final
populati
in NSS
other se

NSS 99
[edit]Ar
There ar
provide
oppositi
of the ar
are often
while ot
both sid
solution
accomm
[edit]Ar
support
 Reserv

necess
influe
popula
benefi
govern
mainta
reserv
legal a
by Gu
(Rajas
increa
 essent
India.
 Althou
do und
educa
Action
many
includ
Africa
was re
Unive
Action
benefi
privile
that B
institu
scores
whites
after g
advan
identic
classm
slightl
whites
institu
profes
 busine
becom
white
comm
 Althou
do und
educa
Action
not ev
privile
repres
grow
in the
indust
Tamil
educa
it is ju
solutio
means
repres
under-
and th
on cam
 Althou
do und
 educa
neede
justice
margi
underp
and th
Reserv
these
lead s
elimin
discrim
widely
especi
(about
popula
 Anti-r
a gros
drain
drain
the "w
rich v
assum
be a fr
must u
drain
meani
 nation
separa
a who
countr
reserv
enoug
drain
 There
reserv
meritr
meritr
withou
people
same
a secti
regard
we ca
Forwa
known
reserv
"merit
have o
proces
more
becom
China
 birth.
highly
man f
comes
which
instea
reserv
must b
fact th
collare
[edit]Ar
anti-res
 Caste

perpet
in soc
weake
social
envisa
Reserv
narrow
 Alloca

of disc
contra
to equ
 The p
never
wides
audit.
reserv
entire
proper
benefi
60 yea
 Poor p
castes
or eco
rich p
caste.
 Many
Comm
suppo
reserv
Mand
the In
catego
Nation
2000,
(32%
exclud
  This p
has al
in bra
aggrav
gradua
start m
univer
educa
[edit]Ot
The foll
have be
find a so
Suggest
Commi
 Sacha

studie
Indian
recom
schem
backw
[16]
Marks based on Merit : 60
Marks based on Household Income
(Irrespective of caste) : 13
Marks based on District in which person
studied(Rural/Urban & Region : 13
Marks based on Family occupation and
caste : 14
Total Marks : 100
The Sac
that OB
instituti
populati
Ministe
commit
recomm
not offe
suggesti
detected
situation
be denie
clearly a
justice
Suggest
Develop
 It has

an imp
Indian
gende
 dispar
canno
a child
schoo
societ
elite p
Some
system
which
exclus
a pers
contri
by Pro
Jawah
the M
Action
here: h
006/ju
Yogen
of the
Societ
Suggest
 Reserv

on obj
 Emph
prima
group
educa
becom
 The n

the pr
(such
 Gover

plan to
 Gover

marria
caste s
This is b
characte
endogam
providin
inter-ca
weaken
 Reserv

status
(But t
suffer
tycoon
 People
tax pa
reserv
reach
achiev
to this
people
injusti
 Using

data o
attainm
wealth
the na
this is
there a
people
then th
castes
runnin
and pr
withou
[edit]Se
 Dhang
 Nation
 Social
 Caste
[edit]Re
1. ^ de Z
Caste,
Sociol
2. ^ [1]

3. ^ [2]

4. ^
a b
C
5. ^
a b
B
OBCs
India,
6. ^
a b
R
Other
and Po
Retrie
7. ^ "Ne

April
8. ^ www

9. ^ Indi

cream
10. ^ Sup

Thaku
11. ^abV
forwa
12. ^ Eva

13. ^ http

_4.htm
14. ^ Ant

15. ^ Nati

16. ^ "Do

day".
May 2
17. ^ The

Articl
18. ^ SC

layer o
19. ^ Sup

20. ^ "Po

Comm
21. ^ "36%

Asian
Retrie
22. ^ Info

23. ^ Stud

Schoo
24. ^ Quo
25. ^ Stat

26. ^ The

News
27. ^ The

Welfa
[edit]Ex
 Why r
B. Raw
 The M
Sharm
 Radic
and th
Feb 20
 Radic
Reserv
Pattan
 Critics
quotas
Discri
System
 Anti R
AntiR
 Supre
 Reserv
 Anti R
 Comp
 Reserv
 South
 Reserv
 Exam
 Reserv
 Multip
(An A
 Reserv
propo
 Quest
 Reserv
faculty
 An Al
 Reserv
States
 UP in
privat
 Rangn
quota
 Reserv
only o
 Bull's

Categor
system |
India
• article

• discus

• edit th

• history
 navigati
 Main

 Conte

 Featur

 Curren

 Rando

search
Top of Form

Bottom of Form
interacti
 About

 Comm

 Recen

 Conta

 Donat

 Help

toolbox
 What

 Relate

 Uploa

 Specia

 Printa

 Perma

 Cite th
  This

T
Com
addi

Wik
the W

99999999999