JOIN USThe Karnataka government’s proposal to increase the caste-based total reservation in government jobs and educational institutions from the existing 50% to 70% is ill-conceived, illogical and, on the face of it, politically motivated. Speaking at the Belagavi session of the state legislature, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah announced that his government will bring forward a new legislation to enhance reservation for various categories of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and the Other Backward Classes based on the findings of the socio-economic census conducted by the government. Though the findings are yet to be made public – some leaked information on the reported population figures of various communities have already created a huge controversy – the chief minister said the government will move forward on increasing the reservation after tabling the report in the legislature by the end of December or January 2017.
After the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Indira Sawhney vs Union of India case in 1992, it has been settled for almost a quarter century that the total reservation shall not exceed 50% and it has been universally accepted across the country, except in Tamil Nadu, whose case is under litigation. Attempts by several state governments to increase the reservation quota by including Muslims and others, have been thwarted by various high courts and the apex court itself. Siddaramaiah did mention “the special provision” under which the neighbouring Tamil Nadu set the reservation at 69% and wants the Centre to similarly bring in a Constitutional amendment to help Karnataka. The argument is deeply flawed because when the Centre yielded to Tamil Nadu’s pressure in 1994 to amend the Constitution, it was done so under the 9th Schedule circumventing fundamental principles of equality, and the issue is still before the SC. Secondly, Karnataka’s contention that it wants to increase the reservation based on new figures of population being tabulated under the socio-economic survey, also fails the test of law as the SC has clearly held in the Indira Sawhney case that there can be only “adequate representation” and not “proportional representation” while fixing quotas for different communities.
Considering the fact that increasing reservation is legally untenable at this point of time and that the NDA government is also unlikely to heed Karnataka’s request to bring forward such an amendment – as such, requests from several other states have already been rejected – it appears that the Siddaramaiah government, by raking up this issue, is trying to make a political statement before the Assembly elections due in about 16 months. Instead of getting into this misadventure, the state government would do well to ensure that the existing quotas are fully utilised for the benefit of reserved classes.