RESERVATION

D.L. Sheth on Muslim Reservation

A section of the Muslim leadership has been demanding a separate ten per cent quota in reservations for Muslims. This is despite the fact that the majority of Muslims is already covered under the existing provision of reservations for the Other Backward Classes.

The new demand, is to extend the provision to all Indians Muslims. The demand concedes that the sub-communities/birdaris of Muslims notified as 'backward', should get the first priority within the proposed separate category of 'Muslims'. The rest of the Muslims should get the benefits of reservations "only if and to the extent that Muslim quotas remain unfulfilled". A caveat is, however, added that the quotas unused by the 'backward' Muslim communities should to go other Muslims.

This demand is part of the leadership's efforts to recover lost ground in the post-Babari Muslim politics. The poor and traditionally backward Muslim communities fear that if all Muslims become entitled to reservations, their opportunities for upward social mobility will be severely curtailed, as

the benefits will then go increasingly to the upper strata of Muslims. This situation may not continue for long.

The demand will re-activate the pernicious pre-Partition discourse that essentialised religious communities as socio-political monoliths, disregarding vital internal social, economic and cultural differences within them.

Within every religious community exists a vertical hierarchy of social groups marked by economic, social and educational differences. These differences ...does not place different groups following one religion within one single, horizontal, social, economic and cultural space. The claim that a; community of faith constitutes a unitary socio-economic and cultural entity, whether by a majority or a minority, in fact, represents a political strategy of (the) elite to elicit majority support from its co-religionists. In effect, such elite politics thwarts aspirations for upward social mobility of a majority within a religious community and denies it the economic and social rights.

Second, by demanding reservations for all Muslims, the Muslim social elite wants to project the communal solidarity of the Muslims by taking over the reins of the backward bandwagon.

Third the policy of OBC reservations recognises specific communities, cutting across religion, as backward or non-backward.

The claim that an entire community of faith is socially and educationally backward is a travesty of sociological truth and makes nonsense of the principle of social justice.

We must, therefore, distinguish between the political principle of minority, relevant for protecting cultural identities and rights, and the social principle of backwardness meant to settle issues of equity and justice  (Finally) the Constitution is foundationally opposed to any idea of 'communal quotas'.                               

(Source: The Times of India, 20 September, 1997)

Shahabuddin's Letter to The Times of India, 22 September 1997

Apropos Mr. D.L. Sheth's article "Muslim Reservations", 20 September, 1997, not only Muslims but several other religious communities have already been declared "Backward Class" within the meaning of Article 15(4) of the Constitution e.g. in Karnataka, Manipur, Tamil Nadu and Kerala. How can the reservation for a religious group, provided it is backward, be unconstitutional?

Secondly, there can be no discrimination on the basis of caste or on the basis of religion (Article 14); yet caste groups which form backward class enjoy reservation since 1950 and more so since 1989. Why can't religion couple with backwardness be treated on par with caste coupled with backwardness.

Thirdly, the word "class" in Article 15 should not be read as caste or as economic class. It can only be read as a product of any rational classification. A cake can be cut in many ways. You can apply the knife horizontally and then vertically or the other way round; you will end up with the same pieces and each piece today demands its share of power and wants to see its face in administration.

You cannot club those pieces against their will. That is why one sees dissention within each macro group – the OBC's, the SC and the ST.

Since Muslims constitute a minority group in all States except J&K, which is also deprived and backward it is demanding like any other identifiable social group to be recognised as an OBC, on the basis of the common parameters. If any sub-group within the Muslim feels cheated, no one can prevent it from opting out and demanding a quota of its own, by itself or in union with other sub-groups.

However, if Mr. Sheth has a strategic interest in dividing the Muslim minority into micro-pieces, I would not stand in his way, so long as he can satisfy the Muslim OBC's that their interests are adequately protected with a common OBC quota. Otherwise, will he concede a separate quota for Muslim OBC's who are relatively more backward than the other OBC's?

Caste identity does, sometimes but not always coincide, with traditional occupational identity. But with education and social mobility, occupational identity, is being lost. Why should then caste identity be the all-embracing criterion, unless reservation was limited only to those who continue to follow traditional occupation?

Finally, whether a religious community particularly a religious minority is an OBC or not, is not a question of theology or ideology or law but of fact and fact only.