Various backward committees – identification of obc’s , their problems and suggestions

DIFFERENT BACKWARD CLASSES COMMISSIONS

Kalelkar Commission, 1953 (First Backward Commission)

As it is made clear, the term “Backward classes” is vague in the sense that it includes a wide variety of lower as well as castes of millions of people. Article 340 of the Constitution provides for the appointment of a commission to investigate the conditions of backward classes. According, the President [that is, the Union Government] appointed on Jan. 29, 1953, The Backward Classes Commission under the chairmanship of Kaka Saheb Kalelkar. The Commission prepared a list containing as many as 2,399 communities which were treated as socially and educationally backward. Out of these, 913 communities alone had an estimated population of 115 million. The Commission adopted the following criteria for determining backwardness:
1. Low Social position in the traditional caste hierarchy of Hindus Society.
2. Lack of general advancement among the major section of a caste or community.
3. Inadequate or no representation in Government services.
4. Inadequate representation in the field of trade, commerce and industry.

Observation Made by Kalelkar Commission

Some of the major observations and recommendations made by the Kalelkar Commission and as referred to by Prof. B. Kuppuswamy can be mentioned here.

  • 1. One of the first recommendations of the Commission was that the 1961 census should provide caste-wise figures so that “before the disease of caste is destroyed all facts about it have to be noted and classified in a certain manner as in a clinical record.”
  • 2. The Commission also pointed out the anomaly which arose when some Scheduled Caste persons called themselves “Harijans” but found that they were not eligible for scholarships, etc. since the term “Harijan” is not in the authorised list.
  • 3. The Commission also recommended that certain sections of the Muslims, Christians, Sikhs should be included among the “Other Backward Classes”
  • 4. The Commission prepared a list of about 2,400 castes on the basis of the position of the caste in social hierarchy, percentage of literacy and its representation in government services and in industries, etc. the Commission also revised the list of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes on the basis of the new information available.
  • 5. “The Commission noted that the great majority of the Backward Classes are ignorant, illiterate, and poor. They are easily exploited by several classes of persons like the traders, the moneylenders.”
  • 6. The Commission also noted that the administration system itself, which has to implement the Constitutional provisions, is tainted casteism; this is one of the reasons why the Backward Classes have no confidence in securing a fair deal even from the administration. The Commission warns that unless this immediately remedied there would be class conflicts which would affect national solidarity.
  • 7. The Commission also draws pointed attention to the contradiction between the theory Hinduism recognised the concept of universality in practice it follows the Laws of Manu which perpetuate the four-fold divisions of the social order and the superiority of the Brahmin class.
  • 8. The Commission notes “A complete revolution in the social outlook of the people is necessary for rendering social justice to all the backward people.”
  • 9. Dealing with the problems of educational backwardness, the Commission noted that only general figures available are the literacy rates which shown a very slow progress. “The problem of education in most of the States is the chief problem of the Backward Classes, for it is they who are extremely backward in education.” Even when special schools and other facilities are provided the children of these classes do not study. The Commission recommends liberal budget provision to give scholarship to the students of the Backward Classes. The Commission recommends that 70% of the seats in professional colleges should be reserved for them; and in making selections, preference should be given to those coming from the most Backward Classes which are indicated in the lists drawn up.
  • 10. With respect to representation in government and local body services the Commission recommended the reservation of 25% of the Class I vacancies, one-third of the Class II Vacancies, and 40%of the III and Class IV for the Backward Classes. This percentage has to be over and above that which has already been conceded to the SCs and STs.
  • 11. As regards reservation in services, the Chairman of the Commission
    laid down: “In this matter one clear principle must be accepted and observed. Reservations, if contemplated, must not exceed 49% whatever the total population of all Reserved Communities be, as far as Classes III and Iv are concerned. In the case of Classes I and Ii he recommended that “the Backward Classes will stand to gain both morally and materially, if they do not demand a reservation percentage in vacancies…. They should demand greatest facilities for training and education in order to fit themselves for the highest jobs, as speedily as possible.”

Policy of the Central Government:

Kalelkar Commission’s report was not accepted by the Central Government due to lot of criticism and objections against it. The Government decided to find out highly objective, realistic and workable criteria to identify the real backward groups and communities of India. The Deputy Registrar General of Census was also consulted to collect through his department information regarding the job in which the so called educationally backward people are found in a large number.  Even that did not yield any fruitful results.

Negotiations with the States:

The Central Government initiated talks with at least 8 state Governments to identify the castes/groups/communities which could be included in the list of Backward Classes. In these negotiations with the State various views came to limelight. The opinions expressed are given below.

  • 1.Some States expressed the view that it is better to identify “backward areas” rather than backward castes/classes.
  • 2. More than the caste, economic factor should be the main criterion.
  • 3. Some States insisted that no change should be made in the existing caste-based list of “backward classes”
  • 4. Central Government has no legal or constitutional obligation to prepare such a list of “backward classes”. Even if the Central Government proposes such a kind of list the State Governments must have freedom to prepare their own list of Backward Classes.
  • 5. Some states expressed their fear that the attempts to classify people either in the name of caste or class would not only damage the unity of the nation but also encourage divisive forces such as caste.
  • 6. Some expressed the view that the attempts to prepare such a list of backward classes is against the principles of a secular, classes democratic socialist society. Hence, it must be dropped once and for all.


Decision of the Central Government

In the light of the expressed views as mentioned above, the Central Government decided to go forward very cautiously. It decided not to prepare list of Backward Classes/ Castes others than SCs and STs. However, it accepted in principle the right of the State Governments to find out their own criteria in order to prepare a list of Backward Classes. The Central Government also suggested to the State Governments that it would be better for them to find out economic criteria rather than caste for this purpose.
Preparation of a list of Backward Classes has become more complicated nowadays because the recent censuses do not contain statistical information about the castes. [The First Backward Classes Commission, had taken into consideration caste-wise statistics available in the reports of Censuses held in 1911, 1921, and 1931, and also taken into account in their approximate increases by 1951.] The existence of certain castes which were never taken into account in the  Census held prior to independence, have further complicated the process of preparing the list of Backward Classes. In fact, some such castes also figured in the list of Backward Classes prepared by the First Commission, and this held to further confusion. Hence, even though the report of the First Backward Classes Commission was published in 1955, it was not accepted by the Government. It decided to provide an opportunity for a nation-wide discussion on the issue.
Finally, it instituted the Second Backward Classes Commission in 1979 under the Chairmanship of B.P. Mandal, an ex-judge, and a member belonging to the Backward Caste. The Commission submitted its report in 1980.

Second Backward Classes Commission-1979: Mandal Commission.

The Government considered seriously the objectives of Articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution and the Second Backward Classes Commission [Mandal Commission] was appointed in 1979. the socially of reference of the Commission included

  • determination of the criteria for defining the socially and educationally backward Classes,
  • determination of the criteria for defining the socially and educationally backward classes,
  • desirability or otherwise of making provision for the reservation of appointments in favour of backward classes which are not adequately  represented in public service and
  • presenting a report setting out the facts as found by the Commission making such recommendations.

The Commission submitted its Report on 31 December 1980. Acceptance of the Recommendations of Mandal Commission After long deliberations on the recommendations of the Mandal Commission, it was decided by the then Government to implement the same. The Mandal Commission in its report[1980] has listed 3743 castes and communities in the Central List whose population is estimated to be 52% of the total population of India. The Commission has recommended 27% reservation for such a large segment of the Indian population. Several write petitions were filed in the Supreme Court questioning the said Reservation. All the writ petitions were disposed off by the Honourable Supreme Court by its judgement dated 16th Nov. 1992. The Court also directed the Government and each of the State Governments to set up a permanent body for reflecting upon the request for inclusion and complaints regarding inclusion in the list of OBCs. Accordingly, a National Commission for Backward Classes [NCBC] was set up on 14th Aug. 1993, which had been reconstituted on 28th Feb.1997.
As per the direction of the Supreme Court, the Govt. of India has notified the Central List of OBCs comprising in first phase, the castes/communities which are common to both the list prepared by the Mandal Commission and State Backward Classes List for 21 States and 5 Union territories. Recently, three notifications on inclusion/amendment in the control list of OBCs have been issued by the Government.

RESERVATION POLICY AS PER MANDAL COMMISSION.

Criteria of Backwardness:

Reservation facility has been provided for people who are considered to be backward. But how is the backwardness of a community decided? Mandal Commission gave 11 criteria for determining social and educational backwardness. In the social and economic indicators, there were four criteria each, while in the educational indicators, there were three criteria. Thus, in total there were 11 indicators. These 11 indicators or criteria which fall into three categories are mentioned below.

A Social Criteria:
1. Social backwardness as considered by others.
2. Dependence mainly on manual labour for live livelihood.
3. Marriage of 25% girls and 10% boys in rural areas, and of 10 girls and 5%boys in urban area below 17 years.
4. Female work Participation 25% above the State average.

B. Educational Criteria.
5. Children between 5 and 15 years never attending school 25% above the State average.
6. Students drop-out rate 25% above the State average.
7. Matriculation rate 25%below the State average.

C. Economic Criteria.
8. Average value of family assets 25%below the State average.
9. Families living in kachcha houses 25% above the State average.
10. Sources of drinking water beyond 500 meters for more than 50% of the families.
11. Consumption loans by households 25% above the State average.

Weightage Given to Each Category of Criteria.
The above mentioned 11 criteria were differently weighted. Social criteria were given a weightage of 3 points each, educational criteria 2 points each, and the economic criteria one point each. Thus the total value was 22[4X3+3X2+4X1=22] points. Any caste getting more than 50% of the points, that is, 11 points, was counted as backward.

Reservation for the OBCs Among the Non-Hindus.
Mandal Commission extended the reservation facility to the OBCs among the non-Hindus. The above mentioned 11 criteria are mostly applied to the case of Hindus communities, including the tribes, to decide their backwardness. Some other criteria are adopted for determining the OBCs among the non-Hindus. All untouchables converted to non-Hindu religions are considered as OBCs. If a nonHindu community continued its traditional occupation, and if that occupation qualified a Hindu community to be as backward as backward, then the non-Hindu community would be included among the OBCs.

Four Channels for Collecting Data to identify the OBCs
The Mandal Commission found out four channels to collect data to identify castes, communities and groups that could be included among the OBCs. These four channels were:

  • 1. Detailed questionnaires, for the public advertised extensively in English and vernacular dailies;
  • 2. Evidence from 97 MPs;
  • 3. Extensive tours of States and Union Territories for meeting elected representatives, leaders social and caste associations, and representatives, from the public.
  • 4. Survey of 405 of the 406 Districts of the country.

Main Recommendations of Mandal Commission.

  • 1. The Commission recommended 27% reservation of the jobs for the OBCs. If enlisted 3743 castes and communities which are entitled for this reservation. As per the Article 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution, quota of reservation should not exceed 50%. Hence, the Commission recommended only 27% reservation for the OBCs though their share in the total population exceed 52%.
  • 2. The Commission recommended that those candidates from the OBCs who were selected through open competition should not be adjusted against the reservation quota.
  • 3. The system of reservation should apply to all levels of promotions.
  • 4. Unfilled reservation quota should be carried on over for 3 years and dereserved only thereafter.
  • 5. Relaxation of upper age limit for direct recruitment form the SCs and STs should be extended to the OBCs.
  • 6. A roster system for each category of posts should be adopted as in the case of the SCs and STs.
  • 7. The 27% reservation to OBCs is applicable to the jobs in Central Government services and public-sector units including the banking sector, LIC, etc.
  • 8. This reservation is also applicable to the private sector undertaking such as educational institutions which receive financial grants from the Central or State governments.
  • 9. All the universities and colleges that receive financial assistance from the government are expected to implement this reservation.
  • 10. Due modifications in the existing system of law, if necessary should be undertaken in order to enforce this reservation.


Some Other Special Recommendations:

  • 1. In order to improve the backward community students’ cultural environment especially in the places in which OBCs reside in a large number, special efforts must be made to give them additional coaching, vocational training and other educational facilities. OBC students studying in professional courses may require such as assistance in order to keep pace with the other community students.
  • 2. In all the States rural people belonging to the OBCs must be given financial assistance either subsidy or cheap rate loans in order to encourage them to take more and more interest in industrial and commercial activities. If needed, the rural semi-skilled and skilled persons of these communities must be provided facilities to improve their expertise in their respective fields.
  • 3. All the State governments are advised to implement land reforms in a strict manner in order to remove the dependence of the tenants, landless labourers, rural professions and the owners of small land holding on the money-lenders and the rich farmers.
  • 4. The Central Government must provide financial assistance to the State governments if they are not able to mobilise sufficient funds in order to take up the various welfare activities mentioned above, for the benefit of the OBCs. This assistance the Central Govt. must provide but as in the manner in which it is providing such an assistance to the States for the welfare activities of the SCs and STs

Historic Judgement of the Supreme Court [15-11-1992]: Its Impact:
After the fall of V.P. Singh’s and Chandrashekar’s ministries at the Centre, 10th Parliamentary Elections took place in 1991 in which Congress came back to power and P.V. Narashimha Rao became the Prime Minister. His Government announced in Sept.1991 that within the 27% of the Union Govt’s civilian jobs reserved for socially and educationally backward classes[SEBC], preference would be given to the poorer sections of such classes. He went a step further and declared 10% reservation for the other economically backward sections of the people who were not covered by any of the existing schemes of reservation. The controversial issue of the implementation of Mandal Commission’s Report was taken to the Supreme Court which gave a historic judgement on it on 15th Nov.1992. The court upheld 27% reservation recommended by the Mandal Commission but struck down the Narasimha Rao Govt.’s decision to reserve 10%
jobs for other economically backward sections.

Important aspects of this judgement as enlisted by Prof. Ram Ahuja are:

  • 1.Caste has been accepted as a basis for identifying the beneficiaries of reservations.
  • 2. The upper limit of reservations has been fixed at 50 per cent.
  • 3. “Creamy layer” has to be excluded from reservations.
  • 4. Reservations in certain technical posts is not advisable.
  • 5. There can be no reservations in promotion.
  • 6. The Union Government shall specify the socio-economic criteria to exclude socially advanced persons among the backward classes.
  • 7. Permanent commissions should be set up by the Union and State governments to examine complaints of over-inclusion and underinclusion and requests for inclusion in the list of  ackward Classes.
Join Telegram