Imagine that you have just won a long race. You are overwhelmed with emotion, because you are so happy that all your efforts have led to this achievement which you have earned, feeling so proud of yourself…
Suddenly you are told that the person who secured the 15th position has just been given the First Prize, because his great grandfather had been denied a prize many decades ago; and you have now been disqualified.
Sounds ridiculous?
You have just experienced what a student securing 96.8% marks feels when he loses his seat in a college to another student with 88% marks falling under a reserved category.
The subject of Reservations in Higher Education in India is a vast one, in terms of a historical account. Reservations were introduced during the last decades of the 19th century when there were two forms of governance: British India and the 600 princely states, though it was only with the arrival of Ambedkar that the minorities acquired a leader of stature and education who could also make a political difference, who submitted a memorandum titled, ‘On the Grievances of the Scheduled Castes’. The scheduled castes were allowed 8.5 per cent reservation in central services and other facilities for the first time in the history of India in 1942.
However, on 27 June 1961, the first Prime Minister of India Jawaharlal Nehru expressed his opposition in a letter to the Chief Ministers, with the following words: “If we go in for reservation on communal and caste basis, we swamp the bright and able people and remain second-rate or third-rate. I am grieved to learn how far this business of reservations has gone based on communal considerations. It has amazed me to learn that even promotions are based sometimes on communal or caste considerations. This way lies not only folly but disaster. The moment we encourage the second rate, we are lost. Let us help the backward groups by all means, but never at the cost of efficiency.“
Further, reservation in higher education is violation of Article 26, Para 1 of Universal Declaration of human rights.
Article 26 (1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
Yet, various institutions of the government of India practice affirmative action in different forms, some of which are as follows.
Delhi University
Out of 54000 available seats in Delhi University, due to a 49.5% reservation quota only 27270 seats are available to the general category students. Note that the SC/ST/OBC category students are eligible to openly compete with GEN students if they are in merit; this results in the competition being thrice as tough for GEN students. Also, many GEN meritorious students were unable to get admission even after five cutoff lists, while there were 7 or 8 lists for the reserved categories, because the government prevents conversion of vacant reserved seats into open seats (i.e. seats which remain vacant will NOT be given to more deserving students but continue to be filled up by the reserved categories). Consequently, a large number of meritorious students had to turn to School Of Open Learning as the last resort (but notice how the link cleverly mentions only those who wouldn’t have been able to seek admission in regular colleges anyway!).
Mumbai University
A multi-lingual city like Mumbai has the unique phenomenon of reservations for linguistic minorities in colleges run by various communities. 50% of the seats in colleges run by Gujarati, Sindhi, Tamil and other non-Marathi-speaking managements are reserved for students speaking that language. Such colleges need not reserve seats for OBC/SC/ST students, but have to do so for physically handicapped, members of the defence forces and government employees with transferable jobs, and students excelling in the arts or sports. Added to this is the 5% management quota. Also, unlike Delhi, Stds XI and XII in Mumbai usually constitute the “Junior College” section, which reserve 20% seats for their ownn students. Thus, 50% seats could be reserved for minorities and 38% for other special reservations, leaving only 12% in the open category. This leads us to the unpleasant reality that however meritorious a student, s/he can only aspire to a third of the available seats in the city’s best colleges.
Indian Institute of Technology
Currently, there exists a reservation of 15% for SC and 7.5% for ST candidates. Based on the results of IIT-JEE, those SC/ST candidates that qualify by a relaxed selection criteria of scoring more than about half of the marks scored by the last General Category student are admitted directly to IITs. The seats reserved for SC/ST students are not transferable to General Category.
I am just as grieved as Jawaharlal Nehru to learn how far this business of reservations has gone.
I thought it was agreed that equal opportunities must be given to all citizens irrespective of caste, creed, race and religion? Then why are the meritorious general category students being denied their right to opportunity when they have earned it? Reservations were part of the constitution when it was released in 1950 as a temporary measure and to serve for a limited period – why is this being extended indefinitely? Meritorious students from general category fail to get admission in desired colleges, while people with a much lower percentage are easily able to secure a seat in the best colleges through quotas. Have you heard about the fake caste certificates scam at DU this year? The guilty people were not students with bad marks – a student with 94% attempted to seek admission with a fake certificate, because as long as this student identified as a General Category student, doors were closed. Not that I support such criminal acts, but imagine the student’s disappointment when even a 94% score for a GEN student wasn’t enough to get admission.
Proponents of reservations seem to have these common myths:
Myth No.1: The compensation for centuries of oppression lies in reserving seats in the present for the backward classes.
I am sorry but no it does not. Indian society seems to have adopted the cult of the victim – consequently, we witness a culture of resentment, accusation, anger and demand for historical compensation (for mistakes of the PAST generations by the future generations!?). The concept of justice is reduced to juggling between particular interests while the holders of power begin to divide people as they juggle between competing claims of victimisation. “Positive discrimination” classifies us into the Oppressed and Oppressors, creating an atmosphere of victimhood and mistrust; this is clearly a major hindrance in national integration.
Myth No.2: You don’t oppose other quotas such as Management Quota or quotas for linguistic or religious minorities!
Actually, I absolutely do. Even though these quotas are availed by the General Category for seats, they are still anti meritocracy in nature and I consider them as unfair as reservations based on caste.
Myth No.3: All the people in backward classes have historically been poor, underprivileged and denied basic human rights.
Contrary to the impression laid down by the proponents of reservations, caste has not been an entirely rigid construct in India; OBCs include Yadavs, who were kings 2000 years ago! Jats were rulers, Patils were village headmen, and one can find numerous instances of royal families (such as the Nandas and the Mauryas) who were neither Brahmin nor Kshatriya nor Bania. After the collapse of the Mughal rule, the section of agriculturists Marathas assumed royal power. The Patels of Gujarat, likewise, have come to play a significant role in the world of commerce. Yet none of these neo-Kshatriya and neo-Bania groups will give up their OBC status for the purpose of reservations!
Myth No.4: The creamy layer has been excluded so the benefits reach the poor people of the backward classes.
Though such exclusion may in principle prevent these neo-Kshatriyas and neo-Banias from monopolizing the benefits of reservations, in practice, the creamy layer isn’t really excluded – hiding incomes in India is easier than you think; although the media will conveniently showcase the few genuinely deserving cases that benefit to mask the actual reality of reservations.
The whole debate about Reservations vs No Reservations really comes down to Merit vs Politics. These “affirmative action” policies are nothing less than the same “Divide and Rule” Policy which were adopted by the British – caste divides us for the wrong reasons. Caste based policies are divisive, anti-secular, and anti-progressive. And anyway the focus of the government is no longer on uplifting the real backward people, but to continue the caste system to generate votes! Until this caste factor is eradicated from politics, Indians will continue to be divided into two categories (the forward classes and the backward) in a nation whose resources are being wasted and never reaching the real needy. The aim of this policy was to give SC/ST/OBC equal opportunities because of their social disadvantages and lack of resources and exposure, but is it really benefitting the ones who need it the most? The rich and creamy layer of these former backward castes which benefits the most from this system continues to avail reservation facilities for their progeny which are no longer needed by them.
Do we need talent or reservations to build our country? How can India bloom with the death of merit?
The reservation policy is perhaps the worst thing to have happened to India, because it results in diluting the quality of professionals by denial of seats to deserving students while letting those with lower marks in. And the fact that many of these students are not fit to qualify as competent professionals is clear when they take longer to complete the course – and are some times withdrawn from the course, because there is no relaxation in marks required for qualifying. In fact, quotas are unfair to reserved categories as well – when a student who cannot handle the challenging lifestyle of IIT is admitted through a quota, it becomes extremely hard for him to cope up; instead, joining a college which matches his caliber could’ve been more beneficial. In the end, meritorious students suffer denial of seats and backward class students suffer because even if they are meritorious, the quota tag will always be attached to them wherever they go. Can you see how this is a lose-lose situation?
How do you define “backwardness” anyway? Are castes the only cause of backwardness? What about discrimination based on gender? What about poor people in rural areas who belong to upper castes? What about religious minorities? If one starts reserving seats for all of these, the question arises if this country is only for the backward people! The trouble is that the basis of reservations is not economic status, but the historical background. Which means that a rich and powerful SC/ST “deserves” unreasonable rights but an economically backward GEN student does not! The only way is to categorize people is by making economic condition as the sole criteria for judging whether a particular person is privileged or under privileged, and benefits be made available to them so that they equip themselves to compete with the rest. Instead of offering free seats to reserved categories, the government should reimburse the entire expenses for education to the economically disadvantaged families, ensuring that quality education is made available to deserving children without financial burden for the poor.
All these measures are necessary at the elementary level, but are not acceptable at the professional level. This is NOT helping the backward classes. Haven’t we all heard how they say, “Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach him how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.” Now the time has arrived which calls to change the prospective of cutoff relaxations in the favour of really needed economic and poor backward classes by implementing the core concept of social welfare and social justice system, instead of castes; although after relaxation they must be encouraged to compete in fair competition with everyone else.
If we all agree that castes must be abolished, just how exactly are reservations helping that? If anything, they generate resentment, apathy and jealousy between caste and caste; the logic “Use caste to achieve a colorblind society,” is an assault on common sense.

