The battle over reservations

On Wednesday, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court (SC) struck down Maharashtra’s move to extend the ambit of reservations in government jobs and educational institutions to the Maratha community; this had resulted in breaching the 50% cap on reservations set by court in the Indira Sawhney judgment of 1992, taking Maharashtra’s reservation up to 68%. While the decision pertained to the state and the specific quota for the Maratha community, the relentless expansion of reservations has made a mockery of India’s entire architecture of affirmative action.

Even as political parties are engaged in blame game, SC’s verdict must open up a conversation about quotas. This newspaper unequivocally supports reservations for Dalits and tribals in India — there has been historic injustice; these marginalised communities lag behind on every social and economic indicator; and ensuring affirmative action to the discriminated is fundamental to India’s goals of being an equitable, ethical democracy.

But reservations have become an endless exercise in power-sharing, dependent on the political heft of the community demanding it. It is seen as a quick fix when the country is going through an employment crisis. They have become a staple demand of dominant agrarian communities (Marathas are an example) because agriculture cannot absorb the young and there aren’t opportunities in either the public or private sector. But what this requires is not additional quotas but a serious attempt to fix India’s political economy and its inherent inequities. Instead of finding ways to breach the 50% cap on reservations, expanding quotas to win over powerful communities for electoral purposes, and painting the judiciary as regressive, the political class must focus on structural problems.