The seemingly innocuous ideas and policies can sometimes result in unexpected outcomes. For example, a country employing the religion based laws in judiciary and the caste based quotas and reservations in jobs etc. for its citizens invariably finds its governmental functions and affairs under a direct or indirect influence of religion and caste. Furthermore, it implies that the character of government is nonsecular even if the country calls and considers itself secular.

The idea behind religious laws seems to be that people should have a legal system commensurate with their cultural and religious heritage. But that in reality can be anachronistic and may even impede efforts to modernize and progress and keep pace with others. In addition, the multiplicity of religion based legal systems in a multicultural and multi religious society -- where each religious community has its own separate religion based legal system which may also lead to different (gender based) legal rights and restrictions for men and women -- will make the overall legal process in the country difficult, cumbersome, time consuming, expensive and replete with unsatisfactory and contradictory judgments (legal decisions). The differing religious laws for different communities will keep people apart, each community having its own legal brand based on its religion, and treat men and women differently in front of the law. This is not a way to build a society where everyone feels treated as equal and fairly in front of the law irrespective of religion and gender.

Similarly, the quotas in jobs etc. are intended for economically backward (underprivileged) people to give them a chance, for a limited and short time, to compete and achieve the same level of educational and economic success as others. But to do it across the board on the basis of caste rather than economic condition of a person, even though quick and easy, is shortsighted and unwise. Note, in any caste not everyone is poor and underprivileged to the same degree and deserving of the same type of government assistance in education and jobs. Similarly, not everyone in any caste is rich and privileged so as not to need outside help in education and jobs from government etc. Thus if the basis for quotas and reservations is caste, then they will be applicable and available to everyone in some castes, even the rich and those not in need belonging to the quota-castes, whereas they will be inapplicable and unavailable to all others including the poor and underprivileged belonging to non-quota castes. This policy involving the government sponsored reservations and quotas in education and jobs appears to be quite discriminatory and casteist towards the poor and underprivileged of certain (non-quota) castes.

In addition to casteism indicated above in caste based quotas, there are other serious flaws in them. For example, there is no sound exit strategy related to their termination because they appear to go on indefinitely. Moreover, people utilizing caste based quotas in education and jobs have no incentive or strict criterion to get off them when their economic condition gets better and they do not require additional assistance from government. In this regard, the recent introduction of creamy layer for quota castes -- an artificial and arbitrary limit on money earned by parents (in quota castes) above which their children do not qualify for reservation and quota in education and jobs -- for harmonizing caste based quotas and reservations appears to be quite inadequate.

A number of cases (1, 2) indicate the problems and confusion related to caste based reservations and quotas in education and jobs. People allocated such privileges, on the basis of caste, are intent to stay with them at all costs and even ready to fight for their continuation (1), thus inadvertently maintaining and prolonging their questionable low-caste (quota) status (3). Furthermore, there are people belonging to certain non-quota castes (such as brahmins and rajputs etc.) who -- even though quite poor and underprivileged (earning as little as a meager Rs. 2400 per month at a daily wage Rs. 80 from work as laborers and even priests) -- may have children that do not qualify for caste-based quotas and reservations in education and jobs (APPENDIX). Meanwhile, and ironically, the Supreme Court is busy these days deciding (2) whether the creamy layer earning limit for quota castes (OBCs etc.) should in future be increased to Rs. 37500 per month (Rs 4.5 lakh annually) from the current Rs. 21000 per month (Rs 2.5 lakh annually).

In conclusion, the religion based judicial laws and the caste based quotas in education and jobs not only lead to intrusion of religion and caste into the affairs and functions of state (government), but also promote and prolong discrimination and casteism in society. They also appear to keep people disunited instead of bringing them together on the basis of equality.

APPENDIX
Income limit raised for creamy layer
(added: January 24, 2009)

CHANDIGARH: The Haryana Government has decided to raise the income limit from Rs.2.5 lakh to Rs.4.5 lakh per year for determining the creamy layer among the other backward classes (OBCs).

According to a circular issued by the State Chief Secretary, sons and daughters of persons having a gross annual income of Rs.4.5 lakh per year (Rs. 37500 per month) will now fall within the creamy layer.

(source: "Income limit raised for creamy layer", The Hindu, Jan. 24, 2009, http://www.hindu.com/2009/01/24/stories/2009012454030500.htm)

COMMENT
How the creamy layer (Rs. 37500 per month) works?

Above news-item from the Hindu newspaper (Jan. 24, 2009) indicates that so called backward or lower classes (castes) families (earning up to Rs. 37500 per month) -- where the parents have surnames and family names referring to or implying the class or caste (ancient or Vedic vocational title) as blacksmith or farmer etc., with numerous similar names on the list, and (family members) free to pursue any type of work or profession including business, farming, college teaching, administrative positions (e.g. SDM, DC) and so on -- will have their children eligible for
(a) college scholarships and free tuition from government,
(b) quotas and reservations in educational institutions,
(c) quotas and reservations in jobs.
Furthermore, if a backward class (OBC) family belonging to the creamy layer (earning more than Rs. 37500 per month or Rs. 4.5 lakhs per annum) and therefore not having its children eligible for above caste based privileges (a, b, c) suddenly finds itself financially in ‘hard times’ and not belonging anymore to the creamy layer (for example, the original creamy layer family may now earn only Rs. 30000 per month or Rs. 3.6 lakhs per annum which is less than the creamy layer limit Rs. 37500 per month or Rs. 4.5 lakhs per annum), then the children of this newly ‘impoverished’ OBC family (earning Rs. 30000 per month or Rs. 3.6 lakhs per annum) will again, in subsequent years, become eligible for above caste based quotas and reservations (a, b, c).

On the other hand, the children belonging to so called forward (upper) classes (castes), where parents have surnames and family names referring to or implying the caste as brahmin or rajput etc., will not qualify for the above privileges -- (a) college scholarships etc., (b) educational institution quotas and reservations, (c) Job quotas and reservations -- even when their parents have very low incomes (as little as Rs. 80 per day or Rs. 2400 per month while working as a priest or a laborer). Note, many people (both men and women) who have surnames indicating their castes as brahmin or rajput etc. are known to make their living while working in manual vocations and low paying jobs, including as lowly workers and menial laborers on daily wage basis. Incidentally, the individual poverty line (limit) in India currently (4) is at about Rs. 450 per month according to Supreme Court and Rs. 1500 per month (at the daily rate of about $1 or Rs. 50) according to World Bank. Thus, interestingly, the children of so called forward class or caste families (brahmin, rajput etc.), where parents may be low earners and even living under the poverty line (on less than Rs. 450 per month), do not qualify for the above privileges (a, b, c), whereas the children of those designated as backward classes etc. (using the title OBC or SC / ST), whose parents could be earning Rs. 30000 per month (Rs. 3.6 lakhs per annum) or more, would be entitled to above privileges (a, b, c).

Note: Thus, if at all necessary, the quotas and reservations in education and jobs should be made available to everyone on the basis of economic condition of the needy, probably keeping the poverty line in mind or even perhaps following the creamy layer consideration used currently for quota castes but preferably at a revised and lower level (in tune with the poverty line). Note that the present quota criterion allowing only certain castes (OBC, SC and ST) already comprises a significant part of the total population, in some places as much as and even more than 50% of people. So why not replace the caste based quotas altogether with a better, fairer and more logical economic consideration, available to the entire population involving all the economically deprived and not just the OBC, SC and ST?

References

(1) "Being a ST seat the constituency was traditionally held by Meena' candidates and the recently elected Dhanka candidate even came under allegations of having contested the election on false caste certificate. The caste hatred in the area has been increasing ever since and has been exaggerated by the recent incident. "......

“Several injured in ‘caste’ clashes”, The Times of India, Jaipur, Dec. 22, 2008; http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Several_injured_in_Jaipur_caste_clashes/articleshow/3871516.cms

(2) "The Supreme Court on Monday sought a reply from the Centre on a batch of petitions challenging the move to raise the annual income ceiling for the creamy layer among the OBC candidates, seeking admission to central educational institutions, from Rs 2.5 lakh (Rs. 21000 monthly income) to Rs 4.5 lakh (Rs. 37500 monthly income). "......

“SC notice to Centre on hiking income limit for creamy layer”, The Times of India, New Delhi, Dec. 15, 2008; http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/SC_notice_to_Centre_on_hiking_income_limit_for_creamy_layer/articleshow/3841516.cms

(3) “The biggest casteist paradox”, http://seva.sulekha.com/blog/post/2008/11/the-biggest-casteist-paradox.htm

(4) Vipul Tripathi, “Whose poor is poor?”, Reuters Blogs, Jan. 10, 2009, http://blogs.reuters.com/india/2009/01/10/whose-poor-is-poor/
------------------------------------
By: Dr. Subhash C. Sharma
Email: [email protected]
Date: Dec. 31, 2008

link to: Related topics by the author