RESERVATION

Shahabuddin's Letter to Dalit Voice, 23 January, 1996

Your editorial "Cow belt Moulanas Opposing Backward Muslim Demand for Reservation" in your issue of 16-31 January, 1996 suffers from internal contradiction, lacks a positive approach and plays into the hands of a non-entity who has been sponsored by his father-in-law to chalk out a Backward Muslim constituency for his political projection in his fading days.

While Ejaz Ali and his BMM base their entire campaign on the existence of 3-way caste-based division in Muslim society - Ashraf, Ajlaf and Arzal, your editorial calls it 'one of the big lies propagated by the Hindu Nazis'.

You appeal to Maulana Syed Abul Hasan Ali Nadvi, who scholarship apart, is a pucca Syed!

You have not cared to check the proportion of the so- called 'Ashraf (Syeds, Sheikhs, Fathans etc.) among the Sawarnas/foreign immigrants Ulema and the Imams of Masjids. I believe they form a small minority; the vast majority belong to what Ejaz Ali would call 'Ajlaf and 'Arzal'.

The provision for reservation in public employment and legislatures for Muslims included in the Draft Constitution was for the Muslim community, as a whole and not for some Muslim castes only. Similarly, the discrimination and deprivation faced by the Muslims in public employment is based on their being Muslims, irrespective of whether they are Syeds or Rayins (the caste group to which Ghulam Sarvar belongs). And the consequent alienation and affection is in the Muslim community as a whole due to their systematic exclusion from due corridors of power at all levels and is not limited to any particular section.

The question is if the Muslims have been systematically deprived when competing against the high castes Hindus, are they likely to get their due share when they (at least two third majority of them) have to compete against the Hindu intermediate castes (Shudras or OBC's) or when group-wise they compete against the intermediate castes (Shudras), the Scheduled Castes (the Achhuts) and the Scheduled Tribes (the Adivasis)?

Theoretically, they may be entitled (at the central level) to 4.2% out of 27% quota for the OBC's, 2% out of 15% for SC's and 1% out of 7.5% for ST's. They shall near get their due share, unless they have a separate sub- quota in each of the three categories. And a fourth sub- quota in the quota for High Castes which has also been mooted.

Further more, will the SC's and ST's agree to comparable Muslim sub-communities being included against their quota? As for the OBC's, already dominated Shudras are rebelling everywhere against the dominant Shudras and demanding a separate quota e.g. the Kurmis and the Koeris in Bihar and UP.

There are many ways of cutting the reservation cake horizontally and vertically but every cut makes it more of an administrative maze. The fairest solution would be to have a Muslim quota as envisaged in the Draft Constitution but recognise the preferential claim of the notified Muslim OBC's (both Ajlaf and Arzal) on the question and make only the unutilized balance available to the 'Ashraf. Also the universally applicable 'creamy layer' cut-off will largely eliminate the Ashraf candidates from the Muslim quota (though it may also eliminate the progeny of rich and well-placed Ajlaf and Arzal like Ejaz Ali and Ghulam Sarwar).

The size of the Muslim quota should be based on the population and index of backwardness of various Muslim sub-communities. Roughly it would be as follows:

                                                     Share of Population of India                 Weight  age      Quota

27.5% descendants of

Sawarnas/foreign immigrants                         3.3                                             33%               1.1

50% descendants of Shudras                          6.0                                             50%               3.0

15% descendants of Achhuts                          1.8                                            100%             1.8

7.5% descendants of Tribes                            0.9                                            100%             0.9

                                                              Total:  12.0                                                          i.e 7.00

But if we take into account the fact that in each category, the Muslims are educationally, economically and socially more backward than the Hindu counterparts, they should have a higher weightage. This may raise their quota to 9%.

I would request you not to lionise motivated individuals and organizations which are trying through hate propaganda to destroy what remains of Muslim unity; Whether reservation is conceded for Muslims as a whole or only for the Backward Muslims, it shall need the undivided support of the entire Muslim community alongwith those of well-wishers like you.

Supreme Court

On Reservation in Single Promotional Post

Chetna Dilip Motghare Vs Bhide Girls EducationSociety, Nagpur

This case is the result of a Review Petition filed against this Court's judgement in Bhide Girls Education Society Vs. Education Officer, Zilla Parishad Nagpur (November, 1992).

While deciding that case this court considered the judgements it gave in Dr. Chakradhar Paswan Vs State of Bihar, AIR 1988, SC 959 and Arti Roy Choudhary Vs Union of India (AIR 1974 SC 532) where in it has been squarely laid down that if there was only one post in the cadre, there could be no reservation under article 16(4) of the Constitution. And the petition seeking review of the earlier judgement was dismissed.

(Source: AIR 1994, Supreme Court 1917)