The story so far: The allotment of Indian Administrative Service (IAS) to Puja Khedkar as an Other Backward Class (OBC) Non-Creamy Layer (NCL) candidate coupled with multiple disabilities has raised issues surrounding the creamy layer in OBC reservation.
What is the history of reservation?
Articles 15 and 16 guarantee equality to all citizens in any policy of the government and public employment respectively. In order to achieve social justice, they also enable special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes or OBC, Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST). Reservations for SC and ST are fixed at 15% and 7.5% respectively, in jobs, educational institutions and public sector undertakings (PSU) at the central level. It was in 1990, when V. P. Singh was Prime Minister, that 27% reservation for OBC was implemented in central government employment based on Mandal Commission (1980) recommendations. Subsequently in 2005, reservation was enabled for OBC, SC and ST in educational institutions including private institutions. In 2019, 10% reservation was enabled for the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) among the unreserved category.
What is the creamy layer?
The 27% reservation for OBC was upheld by the Supreme Court in the Indra Sawhney case (1992). It opined that caste is a determinant of class in the Indian context. However, in order to uphold the basic structure of equality, it fixed a cap of 50% for reservation unless there are exceptional circumstances. The court also provided for exclusion of creamy layer from OBC.
The criteria for identifying a person as part of the creamy layer is based on the recommendations of the Justice Ram Nandan Prasad Committee (1993). It is determined by the position/income of an applicant’s parents alone. The criteria for belonging to creamy layer is parental income, excluding income from salary and agricultural income, being more than ₹8 lakh in each year in the last three consecutive financial years. Further, the following categories of applicants are also considered as belonging to creamy layer : (a) parents, either of whom entered government service (centre or State) as Group A/Class I officer or parents, both of whom entered as Group B/Class II officers or father, who was recruited in Group B/Class II post and promoted to Group A/Class I before 40 years of age; (b) either of the parents employed in a managerial position in PSUs; (c) either of the parents holding constitutional posts.
What are the issues?
The recent controversy has raised issues surrounding the inadequacies in the process. There are allegations that some applicants manage to obtain NCL or EWS certificate through dubious means. The same may also be true with respect to disability certificates in order to take benefit of the 4% of seats reserved for persons with disabilities in central government jobs. There are also allegations of applicants and their parents adopting strategies to get around the creamy layer exclusion like gifting of assets, taking premature retirement etc., since the applicant’s or his/her spouse’s income is not considered for such exclusion. Another contentious issue relates to concentration of reservation benefits. The Rohini Commission, that was set up for providing recommendation on sub-categorisation among OBC castes, has estimated that 97% of reserved jobs and seats in educational institutions have been garnered by just around 25% of the OBC castes/sub-castes at the central level. Close to 1,000 of around 2,600 communities under the OBC category had zero representation in jobs and educational institutes. Similar issue of concentration of reservation benefits persists in the SC and ST category as well. There is neither any exclusion based on ‘creamy layer’ for these communities.
The reservation at present stands at 60%, including the reservation for EWS. Considering societal realities, this higher percentage of reservation is required. It is pertinent to note that as per government replies in Parliament, 40-50% of seats reserved for OBC, SC and ST in the central government remain unfilled.
What can be the way forward?
The foremost requirement is to plug the loopholes in the issue of NCL, EWS and disability certificates. There must be thorough scrutiny to ensure that only eligible applicants obtain these benefits.
The vacancies for reserved communities should be filled without backlogs. Sub-categorisation of reservation may be essential to address the under representation or non-representation of various communities. Similarly, creamy layer exclusion in SC and ST category, at least for children of Group I/Class A government officials may be considered. These are sensitive matters in which for every argument in favour of such a proposal, there are valid counter arguments that can be advanced. Nevertheless, a discussion should begin on these aspects with all stakeholders to implement them. This would ensure that benefits of reservation reach the more marginalised among underprivileged in successive generations.
Rangarajan. R is a former IAS officer and author of ‘Polity Simplified’. Views expressed are personal.
