Panel suggested 8 reasons to hike SC, ST quota

Justice Subhash B Adi Committee has provided eight reasons to the state government to enhance reservation for SC/STs, including a massive increase in their population and lack of adequate representation in jobs.

While STs have grown by 700%, SCs have risen by 50%, according to the High-Level Committee report, accessed by DH. The report was submitted to the government earlier this month.

The Justice Adi Committee was formed to examine the enhancement of reservation for SC/STs as recommended by Justice H N Nagamohan Das Commission.

The committee, in its first argument, stated that in 1955 itself then Mysore state had issued an order providing reservation of 18% while in 1956, the President notified 14 castes under SC and nine under ST list and in the same year, 15% reservation was provided to SCs and 3% to STs.

Between 1956 and 2022, 166 sub-castes were included in the SC list and 106 in the ST list, but the quantum of the reservation has remained the same 15% and 3%, respectively.

In its second argument, the committee stated that Census reports between 1961 and 2011 suggest that the ST population increased seven times (700%) and the SC population by 50%.

“Such a high rate of population among these communities can be attributed to the continuous inclusion of castes/sub-castes into respective caste lists besides the merger of other districts from Madras Presidency, Bombay Presidency and Nizam areas in the state,” the committee pointed out adding its third argument that several sub-castes have failed to secure the benefits of reservation.

When it comes to state government jobs, there is 11.15% SCs and 2.95% STs against 15% and 3%, respectively.

In the fourth argument, citing examples of Madhya Pradesh where the reservation is 73%, Rajasthan (64%) and Uttar Pradesh (60%), the committee argued that Karanataka, too, can enhance reservation as it has the second highest castes included in the ST list next to only Odisha.

In the fifth argument, “...74% of the total communities under SC/STs have remained invisible and nearly 47 of such communities together is less than 1 lakh (in terms of population). The literacy level of these communities is less than 3%. Therefore, these deprived castes in the list of SC/STs could be considered as special circumstances,” the report contended.

Its 6th argument was that the state is within its power to consider all special circumstances to enhance reservation and meet constitutional obligations.

In its seventh argument, the committee argued that some of the states provided a higher percentage of reservations for SC/STs having regard to the increase in their population.

Finally, the committee cited two landmark judgements - Indira Sawhney and Dr Jaishri Patel - to buttress the argument for a hike in the reservation.