Its 2007 – Wake up to Economic Inequality

SC is to hear the petition-challenging quota tomorrow .The apex court had declined to lift its stay over the implementation of the quotas for the OBCs.

The reservations proposed by the UPA government, are based on the Mandal commission report submitted in 1980.I am surely not against reservation to the deserving but surely against the mechanism that defines these so called deserving categories.

The Mandal commission had the following categories to define an a Caste/Tribe, OBC:

SOCIAL:

“(i) Castes/classes considered as socially backward by others.(ii) Castes/classes that mainly depend on manual labor for their livelihood.(iii) Castes/classes where at least 25 per cent females and 10 per cent males above the State average get married at an age below 17 years in rural areas and at least 10 percent females and5 per cent males do so in urban areas.(iv) Castes/classes where participation of females in work is at least 2 per cent above the state average. “

‘Classes which depend on manual labor’ is fine, ‘Considered backward by others’, though ludicrous, is apprehensible. But how on earth can percentage of men and women married under the age of 17 be considered for reservations. And ‘Participation of women in work’ – How clear is that definition.

And the most absurd part is that this is the category that gets the maximum weightage , i.e three points for each criteria.

EDUCATIONAL:

“(v) Castes/classes where the number of children in the age group of’ 5-15 years who never attended school is at least 25 per cent above the state average.(vi) Castes/classes where the rate of student drop-out in the age group of 5-15 years is atleast 25 per cent above the state average.(vii) Castes/classes amongst whom the proportion of matriculates is at least 25 per cent below the state average.”

Now this is meaningful as long as the interpretation and the intent is correct. These have been graced with two points /Criteria.

ECONOMIC:

“(viii) Castes/classes where the average value of family assets is at least 25 per cent belowthe state average.(ix) Castes/classes where the number of families living in kuccha houses is at least 25 percent above the state average.(x) Castes/classes where the source of drinking water is beyond half a kilometer for more than 50 per cent of the households.(xi) Castes/classes where the number of households having taken consumption loans is atleast 25 per cent above the state average.”

This is the Justest category, But sadly the last one and also the one with the least points – One point each.

How is this reservation going to help build equality? In today’s world the greatest inequality is the economic one. You never see a rich person belonging to a OBC being ill treated in a restaurant, beach, temple or any place for that matter. The basic categorization of the commission report which has least importance to the economic backwardness is digressive in present-day.

And the biggest blunder was that the commission had no caste wise data available with it, so used the 1931 census data to calculate the number of OBCs (based on the ridiculous categorized point system mentioned above).That was 49 years old data and now when the government is planning to implement the suggestions, the data would be 76 years old. Even most of the people who took part in the census must be dead by now (No offence meant).

Should such an important life defining decision be made based on some ridiculous point system which takes into count a census 76 years old, with a “devil-may-care” attitude.

The commission report lacks the main ingredient – THE LOGIC.

The times have changed, economic inequality overweighs social one. Reservations if is to be implemented, should be based on the economic status of the individuals and not based on some illogical commission report.