Gujarat quota
In his response to the panel during consultations held between January 19 and 26, 2009, Modi had said parameters must be decided beforehand and debated in the open forum involving the state government. He had also said it must be known beforehand how much population came under the criteria (of quota); thereafter, a suitable strategy could be worked out for providing support and assistance.
On January 9, after the bill was passed in the Rajya Sabha, the PM had tweeted, “By passing The Constitution (One Hundred And Twenty-fourth Amendment) Bill, 2019, we pay tributes to the makers of our Constitution and the great freedom fighters, who envisioned an India that is strong and inclusive…passage of Bill, in both Houses of Parliament is a victory for social justice. It ensures a wider canvas for our Yuva Shakti to showcase their prowess and contribute towards India’s transformation.”
However, in 2009, he had stressed that the requirement of all states could not be judged with the same yardstick and it had to be different keeping in view the ground reality.
The Gujarat government was also recorded to have said that if a higher criterion for EBCS was fixed, it would be injustice to the Below Poverty Line (BPL) families as their size itself was very large, about a third of the state’s then population. The state then had a GC population of 5.7%.
BJP spokesperson GVL Narasimha Rao said the decision taken to give quotas was based on the recommendations of the Sinho committee as well as “developments after 2010 [when the report was submitted].”
“The Congress slept over the report that clearly recommended affirmative action even though they talked about the reservation in their manifesto. They showed lack of seriousness about commitment to the poor,” Rao said.
Even though the bill was supported by several Opposition parties, questions have been raised on the rationale in setting ~8 lakh as the annual income limit for eligible EBCS.
The cut off of ~8 lakh would lead to “resentment” said prof Anand Kumar of the Jawaharlal Nehru University. The change in BJP’S stance on the issue of EBC reservation itself, he said, was based on three considerations.
“The first being the all round revolt by dominant castes such as the Patels, Marathas and the Jats over lack of constitutional support for them; the impression since the Mandal Commission report that there has to be some accommodation for the economically deprived, particularly in the upper castes; and the immediate backlash that the BJP faced in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan elections,” prof Kumar said.
D Shyam Babu, a Dalit academic at the Centre for Policy Research, said though he is not against breaching the 50% cap on reservation, the bill introduced by the government can be legally challenged.
“In electoral politics, parties have the right to impress people to get votes, but with this bill we are headed into a long period of litigation. Some people are likely to challenge this [quota] in court.”
Babu said some states such as Tamil Nadu had been questioning the relevance of capping the quotas at 50%, pointing out how OBCS were not given representation as per their population.