Reservation in India

Reservation in India

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Not to be confused with Indian Reservation.
Caste and community profile of people below the poverty line in India, as outlined in the Sachar Report

The Reservation in India is wherein the Indian government provides Affirmative action whereby a percentage of posts are reserved in employment in Government and in the public sector units, and in all public and private educational institutions. But there is no quota system that exists in the religious/ linguistic minority educational institutions, in order to mitigate the perceived backwardness of the Other Backward Classes and the Scheduled Castes and Tribes.


According to the Indian government, Scheduled Castes are those communities, that had suffered from the reputation of untouchability in some form while scheduled Tribes are generally those who have been living away from the modern civilizations and developments.[1] . The reservation policy is also extended to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes for representation in the Parliament of India. Central government of India reserves 27% of higher education[1], and individual states may legislate further reservations.


Reservation cannot be exceeded 50%, as per the rulings given by the supreme court[2], but certain Indian states like Rajasthan have proposed a 68 % reservation which includes a 14% reservation for forward castes.[3] The objective of the reservation for SC's and ST's is to provide jobs to some people of these communities and increase their representation but that main objective that it has is to increase the social and educational status of these people so that they can take their rightful place in the common society.[1]


Caste is the most used criteria to identify under-represented groups. However there are other identifiable criteria for under-representation—gender (women are under represented), state of domicile (North Eastern States, as Bihar and Uttar Pradesh are under-represented), rural people, etc. -- as revealed by the Government of India sponsored National Family Health and National Sample surveys. The underlying theory is that the under-representation of the identifiable groups is a legacy of the Indian caste system. After India gained independence, the Constitution of India listed some erstwhile groups as Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST). The framers of the Constitution believed that, due to the caste system, SCs and the STs were historically oppressed and denied respect and equal opportunity in Indian society and were thus under-represented in nation-building activities.


The Constitution laid down 15% and 7.5% of vacancies to government aided educational institutes and for jobs in the government/public sector, as reserved quota for the SC and ST candidates respectively for a period of five years, after which the situation was to be reviewed. This period was routinely extended by the succeeding governments. Later, reservations were introduced for other sections as well. The Supreme Court ruling that reservations cannot exceed 50% (which it judged would violate equal access guaranteed by the Constitution) has put a cap on reservations. However, there are state laws that exceed this 50% limit and these are under litigation in the Supreme Court. For example, the caste-based reservation fraction stands at 69% and is applicable to about 87% of the population in the state of Tamil Nadu (see section on Tamil Nadu below).

Contents

[hide]

[edit]History of the practice

Main articles: Poona Pact, Communal Award, 1946 Cabinet Mission to India, Kalelkar Commission, Mandal Commission, and 2006 Indian anti-reservation protests

[edit]In Pre-Independence India

Reservations in favour of Backward Classes (BCs) were introduced long before Independence in a large area, comprising the Presidency areas and the Princely States south of the Vindhyas. Chatrapati Sahuji Maharaj, Maharaja of Kolhapur in Maharashtra introduced reservation in favour of non-Brahmin and backward classes as early as 1902. He provided free education to everyone and opened several hostels in Kolhapur to make it easier for everyone to receive the education. He also made sure everyone got suitable employment no matter what social class they belonged. He also appealed for a class-free India and the abolition of untouchability. The notification of 1902 created 50% reservation in services for backward classes/communities in the State of Kolhapur. This is the first official instance (Government Order) providing for reservation for depressed classes in India. [2]

The concept of untouchability was not practiced uniformly throughout the country, therefore the identification of oppressed classes was difficult to carry out. Allegedly, the practice ofsegregation and untouchability prevailed more in the southern parts of India as opposed to in Northern India. Furthermore, certain castes/ communities, considered "untouchable" in one province were not in other provinces.[3]

The continuous efforts of some of the social reformers of the country viz. Rettamalai Srinivasa Paraiyar, Ayothidas Pandithar, Jyotiba Phule, Babasaheb Ambedkar, Chhatrapati Sahu ji Maharaj and others, continually strived to eradicate "casteism".

    • 1882 - Hunter Commission appointed. Mahatma Jyotirao Phule made a demand of free and compulsory education for all along with proportionate reservation/representation in government jobs.[4]
    • 1891 - The demand for reservation of government jobs with an agitation (in the princely State of Travancore) against the recruitment of non-natives into public service overlooking qualified native people.[4]
    • 1901 - Reservations were introduced in Maharashtra (in the Princely State of Kolhapur) by Shahu Maharaj. [4]
    • 1908 - Reservations were introduced in favour of a number of castes and communities that had little share in the administration by the British.[4]
    • 1909 - Provisions were made in the Indian Councils Act 1909[4]
    • 1919 - Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms introduced.[4]
    • 1919 - Provisions were made in the Government of India Act 1919.[4]
    • 1921 - Madras Presidency introduces Communal G O in which reservation of 44 per cent for non-Brahmins, 16 per cent for Brahmins, 16 per cent for Muslims, 16 per cent for Anglo-Indians/ Christians and eight per cent for Scheduled Castes.[4]
    • 1935 - Indian national congress passes resolution called Poona Pact to allocate separate electoral constituencies for depressed classes.[4]
    • 1935 - Provisions in Government of India Act 1935.[4]
    • 1942 - B.R. Ambedkar established the All India Depressed Classes federation to support the advancement of the scheduled castes. He also demanded reservations for the Scheduled castes in government services and education.[4]
    • 1946 - 1946 Cabinet Mission to India proposes proportionate representation with several other recommendations.[4]
    • 1947 - India obtained Independence. Dr. Ambedkar was appointed chairman of the drafting committee for Indian Constitution. The Indian constitution prohibits discrimination on the grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex and place of birth.[5] While providing equality of opportunity for all citizens, the constitution contains special clauses "for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes".[5] Separate constituencies allocated to Scheduled Castes and Tribes to ensure their political representation for 10 years.(These were subsequently extended for every 10 years through constitutional amendments).[4]

[edit]Post-Independence India

    • 1947–1950 - Debates of the Constituent Assembly.
    • 26/01/1950-The Constitution of India came in force.
    • 1953 - Kalelkar Commission was established to assess the situation of the socially and educationally backward class. The report was accepted as far as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes were concerned. The recommendations for OBC's were rejected.
    • 1956 - Schedules amended as per Kaka Kalelkar report.
    • 1976 - Schedules amended.
    • 1979 - Mandal Commission was established to assess the situation of the socially and educationally backward.[6] The commission didn't have exact figures for a sub-caste, known as the Other Backward Class(OBC), and used the 1930[7] census data, further classifying 1,257 communities as backward, to estimate the OBC population at 52%.[7]
    • 1980 - the commission submitted a report, and recommended changes to the existing quotas, increasing them from 22% to 49.5%.[6]As of 2006 number of castes in Backward class list went up to 2297 which is the increase of 60% from community list prepared by Mandal commission.
    • 1990 - Mandal commission recommendations were implemented in Government Jobs by Vishwanath Pratap Singh. Student Organisations launched nationwide agitations. Rajiv Goswami Delhi university student attempted self-immolation. Many students followed suit.
    • 1991 - Narasimha Rao Government introduced 10% separate reservation for Poor Among Forward Castes.
    • 1992 - Supreme court upheld reservations to Other backward classes in Indira Sawhney Case. Also see Reservations and Judiciary section
    • 1995 - Parliament by 77th Constitutional amendment inserted Art 16(4) (A) permitting reservation in promotions to the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes. Later it was further amended to include consequential seniority by 85th amendment.
    • 1998 - Central Government conducted large nationwide survey for the first time to estimate economical and educational status of various social groups.. The National Sample Survey puts the figure at 32%[1]. There is substantial debate over the exact number of OBC's in India, with census data compromised by partisan politics. It is generally estimated to be sizable, but lower than the figures quoted by either the Mandal Commission or and national Sample Survey [2]. Mandal commission has been criticised of fabricating the data. National surveys indicated that status of OBC is comparable to Forward castes in many areas.[[8] http://www.business-standard.com/common/storypage.php?autono=264481&leftnm=4&subLeft=0&chkFlg=]
    • 12 August 2005 - The Supreme Court delivered a unanimous judgement by 7 judges on 12 August 2005 in the case of P.A. Inamdar & Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. declaring that the State can't impose its reservation policy on minority and non-minority unaided private colleges, including professional colleges.
    • 2005 - 93rd Constitutional amendment brought for ensuring reservations to other backward classes and Scheduled castes and Tribes in Private Educational institutions. This effectively reversed the 2005 August Supreme Court judgement.
    • 2006 - The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in M. Nagraj & Ors Vs. Union of India & Ors upheld the constitutional validity of Art 16(4) (A), 16(4) (B) and proviso to Art 335.
    • 2006 - Reservations introduced for Other backward classes in Central Government Educational Institutions. Total Reservation went up to 49.5%. Also See Recent Development.
    • 2007 - Supreme Court give stayed on OBC reservation in Central Government Educational Institutions.
    • 2008 - The Supreme Court of India on 10 April 2008, upheld the Government's move for initiating 27% OBC quotas in Government funded institutions. The Court has categorically reiterated its prior stand that "Creamy Layer" should be excluded from the ambit of reservation policy. The Supreme Court avoided answering the question whether reservations can be made in private institutions, stating that the question will be decided only as and when a law is made making reservations in private institutions. The verdict produced mixed reactions from supporting and opposing quarters. Several criteria to identify creamy layer has been recommended, which are as follows:[9] Those with family income above Rs 250,000 a year should be in creamy layer, and excluded from the reservation quota. Also, children of doctors, engineers, chartered accountants, actors, consultants, media professionals, writers, bureaucrats, defence officers of colonel and equivalent rank or higher, high court and Supreme Court judges, all central and state government Class A and B officials. The court has requested Parliament to exclude MPs’ and MLAs’ children, too.
    • 2010 - The Supreme Court held that if the state wants to frame rules with regard to reservation in promotions and consequential seniority it has to satisfy itself with quantifiable data that is there is backwardness, inadequacy of representation in public employment and overall administrative inefficiency and unless such an exercise was undertaken by the state government the rules in promotions and consequential seniority cannot be introduced.

[edit]Judgements on Reservations

Indian Judiciary has pronounced some Judgments upholding reservations and some judgments for fine tuning its implementations. Lot of judgments regarding reservations have been modified subsequently by Indian parliament through constitutional amendments. Some judgments of Indian judiciary has been flouted by state and central Governments. Given below are the major judgments given by Indian courts and its implementation status:[10][11]

YearJudgementImplementation Details
1951Court pronounced that caste based reservations as per Communal Awardviolates Article 15(1).

(State of Madras Vs. Smt. Champakam Dorairanjan AIR 1951 SC 226)

1st constitutional amendment (Art. 15 (4)) introduced to make judgement invalid.
1963Court put 50% cap on reservations in

M R Balaji v Mysore AIR 1963 SC 649

Almost all states except Tamil Nadu (69%, Under 9th schedule) and Rajasthan (68% quota including 14% for forward castes, post gujjar violence 2008) has not exceeded 50% limit. Tamil Nadu exceeded limit in 1980. Andhra Pradesh tried to exceed limit in 2005 which was again stalled by high court.
1992Supreme court in Indira Sawhney & Ors v. Union of India. AIR 1993 SC 477 : 1992 Supp (3)SCC 217 upheld Implementation of separate reservation for other backward classes in central government jobs.Judgement implemented
Ordered to exclude Creamy layer of other backward classes from enjoying reservation facilities.All states except Tamil Nadu implemented. Recent Reservation bill for providing reservations to other backward classes in educational institutions also has not excluded Creamy layer in some states. (Still under the consideration of Standing committee).
Ordered to restrict reservations within 50% limit.All states except Tamil Nadu followed.
Declared separate reservations for economically poor among forward castes as invalid.[citation needed]Judgement implemented[citation needed]
In General Manager, S. Rly. v. Rangachari AIR 1962 SC 36, State of Punjab v. Hiralal 1970(3) SCC 567, Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karamchari Sangh (Railway) v. Union of India (1981) 1 SCC 246 it was held that Reservation of appointments or posts under Article 16(4)

included promotions. This was overruled in Indira Sawhney & Ors v. Union of India. AIR 1993 SC 477 : 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217 and held that Reservations cannot be applied in promotions. Union of India Vs Varpal Singh AIR 1996 SC 448, Ajitsingh Januja & Ors Vs State of Punjab AIR 1996 SC 1189, Ajitsingh Januja & Ors Vs State of Punjab & Ors AIR 1999 SC 3471, M.G. Badappanavar Vs State of Karnataka 2001 (2) SCC 666.

Ashok Kumar Gupta: Vidyasagar Gupta Vs State of Uttar Pradesh. 1997 (5) SCC 201

77th Constitution amendment (Art 16(4 A) & (16 4B) introduced to make judgement as invalid. M. Nagraj & Ors v. Union of India and Ors. AIR 2007 SC 71 held the amendments constitutional. 1. Art. 16(4)(A) and 16(4)(B) flow from Art. 16(4). Those constitutional amendments do not alter structure of Art. 16(4). 2. Backwardness and inadequacy of representation are the controlling/compelling reasons for the state to provide reservations keeping in mind the overall efficiencies of state administration. 3. Government has to apply cadre strength as a unit in the operation of the roaster in order to ascertain whether a given class/group is adequately represented in the service. Roaster has to be post specific with inbuilt concept of replacement and not vacancy based. 4. If any authority thinks that for ensuring adequate representation of backward class or category, it is necessary to provide for direct recruitment therein, it shall be open to do so. 5. Backlog vacancies to be treated as a distinct group and are excluded from the ceiling limit of 50%. 6. If a member from reserved category gets selected in general category, his selection will not be counted against the quota limit provided to his class and reserved category candidates are entitled to compete for the general category post. 7. The reserved candidates are entitled to compete with the general candidates for promotion to the general post in their own right. On their selection, they are to be adjusted in the general post as per the roster and the reserved candidates should be adjusted in the points earmarked in the roster to the reserved candidates. 8. Each post gets marked for the particular category of candidate to be appointed against it and any subsequent vacancy has to be filled by that category alone (replacement theory). R K Sabharwal Vs St of Punjab AIR 1995 SC 1371 : (1995) 2 SCC 745. The operation of a roster, for filling the cadre-strength, by itself ensures that the reservation remains within the 50% limit.

In Union of India Vs Varpal Singh AIR 1996 SC 448 and

Ajitsingh Januja & Ors Vs State of Punjab AIR 1996 SC 1189 it was held that a roster point promotees getting the benefit of accelerated promotion would not get consequential seniority and the seniority between the reserved category candidates and general candidates in promoted category shall be governed by their panel position. This was overruled in Jagdish Lal and others v. State of Haryana and Others (1997) 6 SCC 538 it held that the date of continuous officiation has to be taken into account and if so, the roster- point promotees were entitled to the benefit of continuous officiation. Ajitsingh Januja & Ors Vs State of Punjab & Ors AIR 1999 SC 3471 overruled Jagdish Lal M G Badappanvar Vs St of Karnataka 2001(2) SCC 666 : AIR 2001 SC 260 held that roster promotions were meant only for the limited purpose of due representation of backward classes at various levels of service and therefore, such roster promotions did not confer consequential seniority to the roster point promotee.

By 85th Constitution amended Consequential Seniority was inserted in Art 16 (4)(A) to make the judgement invalid.

M. Nagraj & Ors v. Union of India and Ors. AIR 2007 SC 71 held the amendments constitutional. Jagdish Lal and others v. State of Haryana and Others (1997) 6 SCC 538 it held that the date of continuous officiation has to be taken into account and if so, the roster- point promotees were entitled to the benefit of continuous officiation.

S. Vinodkumar Vs. Union of India 1996 6 SCC 580 held that relaxation of qualifying marks and standard of evaluation in matters of reservation in promotion was not permissibleBy the Constitution (82nd) Amendment Act a proviso was inserted at the end of Art 335.

M. Nagraj & Ors v. Union of India and Ors. AIR 2007 SC 71 held the amendments constitutional.

2010Suraj Bhan Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan. Held that, in view of M. Nagraj & Ors v. Union of India and Ors. AIR 2007 SC 71, if the state wants to frame rules with regard to reservation in promotions and consequential seniority it has to satisfy itself with quantifiable data that is there is backwardness, inadequacy of representation in public employment and overall administrative inefficiency and unless such an exercise was undertaken by the state government the rules in promotions and consequential seniority cannot be introduced.

Reservation in promotion is dependent on the inadequacy of representation of members of SC, ST and backward classes and subject to the condition of ascertaining whether such reservation was at all required. As no exercise was undertaken to acquire quantifiable data regarding in adequacy of representation. The Rajasthan High Court rightly quashed the notifications providing for consequential seniority and promotion to the members of SC and ST communities and the same does not call for any interference. S. Balakrishnan Vs. S. Chandrasekar (28/2/2005) The Government of Tamil Nadu Vs. Registration Department SC/ST (9/12/2005) The Madras High Court has held that reservation in promotion is available only to SC and ST and not to backward class (OBC) and most backward class (MBC) Sudam Shankar Baviskar Vs. Edu. Off. (Sec), Z.P. Jalgaon 2007 (2) MhLJ 802. Held that consequential seniority is not available to VJNT.

2010UOI v/s. S. Kalugasalamoorthy

Held that when a person is selected on the basis of his own seniority, the scope of considering and counting him against reserved quota does not arise.

1994Supreme court advised Tamil Nadu to follow 50% limitTamil Nadu Reservations put under 9th Schedule of the constitution.

I.R. Coelho (Dead) by LRS. Vs. State of T.N. 2007 (2) SCC 1 : 2007 AIR(SC) 861 Held, Ninth Schedule law has already been upheld by the court, it would not be open to challenge such law again on the principles declared by this judgment. However, if a law held to be violative of any rights in Part III is subsequently incorporated in the Ninth Schedule after 24 April 1973, such a violation/infraction shall be open to challenge on the ground that it destroys or damages the basic structure as indicated in Article 21 read with Article 14, Article 19 and the principles underlying thereunder. Action taken and the transactions finalized as a result of the impugned Acts shall not be open to challenge.

2005In Unni Krishnan, J.P. & Ors. Vs. State of Andhra

Pradesh & Ors. (1993 (1) SCC 645), it was held that right to establish educational institutions can neither be a trade or business nor can it be a profession within the meaning of Article 19(1)(g). This was overruled in T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka (2002) 8 SCC 481, P.A.Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra 2005 AIR(SC) 3226 Supreme court ruled that reservations cannot be enforced on Private Unaided educational institutions.

93rd constitutional amendment introduced Art 15(5).

Ashoka Kumar Thakur vs. Union of India[12] 1. The Constitution (Ninety-Third Amendment) Act, 2005 does not violate the "basic structure" of the Constitution so far as it relates to the state maintained institutions and aided educational institutions. Question whether the Constitution (Ninety-Third Amendment) Act, 2005 would be constitutionally valid or not so far as "private unaided" educational institutions are concerned, is left open to be decided in an appropriate case. 2."Creamy layer" principle is one of the parameters to identify backward classes. Therefore, principally, the "Creamy layer" principle cannot be applied to STs and SCs, as SCs and STs are separate classes by themselves. 3. Preferably there should be a review after ten years to take note of the change of circumstances. 4. A mere graduation (not technical graduation) or professional deemed to be educationally forward. 5. Principle of exclusion of Creamy layer applicable to OBC's. 6. The Central Government shall examine as to the desirability of fixing a cut off marks in respect of the candidates belonging to the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) to balance reservation with other societal interests and to maintain standards of excellence. This would ensure quality and merit would not suffer. If any seats remain vacant after adopting such norms they shall be filled up by candidates from general categories. 7. So far as determination of backward classes is concerned, a Notification should be issued by the Union of India. This can be done only after exclusion of the creamy layer for which necessary data must be obtained by the Central Government from the State Governments and Union Territories. Such Notification is open to challenge on the ground of wrongful exclusion or inclusion. Norms must be fixed keeping in view the peculiar features in different States and Union Territories. There has to be proper identification of Other Backward Classes (OBCs.). For identifying backward classes, the Commission set up pursuant to the directions of this Court in Indra Sawhney 1 has to work more effectively and not merely decide applications for inclusion or exclusion of castes. 8. The Parliament should fix a deadline by which time free and compulsory education will have reached every child. This must be done within six months, as the right to free and compulsory education is perhaps the most important of all the fundamental rights (Art.21 A). For without education, it becomes extremely difficult to exercise other fundamental rights. 9. If material is shown to the Central Government that the Institution deserves to be included in the Schedule (institutes which are excluded from reservations) of The Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006 (No. 5 of 2007), the Central Government must take an appropriate decision on the basis of materials placed and on examining the concerned issues as to whether Institution deserves to be included in the Schedule of the said act as provided in Sec 4 of the said act. 10. Held that the determination of SEBCs is done not solely based on caste and hence, the identification of SEBCs is not violative of Article 15(1) of the Constitution.

Relevant Cases

  1. See Arts 12, 14, 15, 16, 19, 335 of the Constitution of India.
  2. State of Madras Vs. Smt. Champakam Dorairanjan AIR 1951 SC 226
  3. General Manager, S. Rly v. Rangachari AIR 1962 SC 36
  4. M R Balaji v. State of Mysore AIR 1963 SC 649
  5. T. Devadasan v Union AIR 1964 SC 179.
  6. C. A. Rajendran v. Union of India AIR 1965 SC 507.
  7. Chamaraja v Mysore AIR 1967 Mys 21
  8. Barium Chemicals Ltd. Vs Company Law Board AIR 1967 SC 295
  9. P. Rajendran Vs. State of Madras AIR 1968 SC 1012
  10. Triloki Nath Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir AIR 1969 SC 1
  11. State of Punjab vs. Hira Lal 1970(3) SCC 567
  12. State of A.P. Vs U.S.V. Balram AIR 1972 SC 1375
  13. Kesavanand Bharti v St of Kerala AIR 1973 SC 1461
  14. State of Kerala Vs N. M. Thomas AIR 1976 SC 490 : (1976) 2 SCC 310
  15. Jayasree Vs. State of Kerala AIR 1976 SC 2381
  16. Minerva Mills Ltd Vs Union (1980) 3 SCC 625 : AIR 1980 SC 1789
  17. Ajay Hasia v Khalid Mujib AIR 1981 SC 487
  18. Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karamchari Sangh Vs Union (1981) 1 SCC 246
  19. K. C. Vasant Kumar v. Karnataka AIR 1985 SC 1495
  20. Comptroller & Auditor-General of India, Gian Prakash Vs K. S. Jaggannathan (1986) 2 SCC 679
  21. Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs A. P. State Electricity Board (1991) 3SCC 299
  22. Indira Sawhney & Ors v. Union of India AIR 1993 SC 477 : 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217
  23. Unni Krishnan v. State of A.P. and Ors. (1993 (1) SCC 645)
  24. R K Sabharwal Vs St of Punjab AIR 1995 SC 1371 : (1995) 2 SCC 745
  25. Union of India Vs Varpal Singh AIR 1996 SC 448
  26. Ajitsingh Januja & Ors Vs State of Punjab AIR 1996 SC 1189
  27. Ashok Kumar Gupta: Vidyasagar Gupta Vs State of Uttar Pradesh. 1997 (5) SCC 201
  28. Jagdish Lal and others v. State of Haryana and Others (1997) 6 SCC 538
  29. Chander Pal & Ors Vs State of Haryana (1997) 10 SCC 474
  30. Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh Vs. Faculty Association 1998 AIR(SC) 1767 : 1998 (4) SCC 1
  31. Ajitsingh Januja & Ors Vs State of Punjab & Ors AIR 1999 SC 3471
  32. Indira Sawhney Vs. Union of India. AIR 2000 SC 498
  33. M G Badappanvar Vs St of Karnataka 2001(2) SCC 666 : AIR 2001 SC 260
  34. T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka (2002) 8 SCC 481
  35. NTR University of Health Science Vijaywada v. G Babu Rajendra Prasad (2003) 5 SCC 350
  36. Islamic Academy of Education & Anr. v. State of Karnataka & Ors. (2003) 6 SCC 697
  37. Saurabh Chaudri & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. (2003) 11 SCC 146
  38. P.A. Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra 2005 AIR(SC) 3226
  39. I.R. Coelho (Dead) by LRS. Vs. State of T.N. 2007 (2) SCC 1 : 2007 AIR(SC) 861
  40. M. Nagraj & Ors v. Union of India and Ors. AIR 2007 SC 71
  41. Ashok Kumara Thakur Vs Union of India. 2008
  42. K. Manorama Vs Union of India.(2010) 10 SCC 323.
  43. Suraj Bhan Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan (2011) 1 SCC 467.

[edit]Different criteria for Reservation

Seats in educational institutions and jobs are reserved based on a variety of criteria. The quota system sets aside a proportion of all possible positions for members of a specific group. Those not belonging to the designated communities can compete only for the remaining positions, while members of the designated communities can compete for all positions (reserved and open).

For example, when 2 out of 10 clerical positions in railways are reserved for ex-servicemen, those who have served in the Army can compete both in the General Category as well as in the specific quota.

[edit]Caste based

Seats are reserved for Schedules Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Castes (based chiefly on caste at birth) in varying ratio by the central government and state government. This caste is decided based on birth, and can never be changed.

In central government funded higher education institutions, 22.5% of available seats are reserved for Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) students (15% for SCs, 7.5% for STs). This reservation percentage has been raised to 49.5%, by including an additional 27% reservation for OBCs. This ratio is followed even in Parliament and all elections where a few constituencies are earmarked for those from certain communities (which keeps rotating as per the Delimitation Commission).

The exact percentages differ from state to state :

    • In Tamil Nadu, the percentage of reservation is 28% for SCs and 8% for STs, being based on local demographics.
    • In Andhra Pradesh, 25% of educational institutes and government jobs for BCs, 15% for SCs, 6% for STs and 4% for Muslims.
    • In West Bengal, 35% of educational institutes and 45% of government jobs for SC,ST, and OBC.(25% SC, 12% ST, and 8% Muslim).

[edit]Gender based

Women's reservations Women get 33% reservation in gram panchayat (village assembly - a form of local village government) and municipal elections. There is a long-term plan to extend this reservation to parliament and legislative assemblies. For instance, some law schools in India have a 30% reservation for females. Progressive political opinion in India is strongly in favor of providing preferential treatment to women in order to create a level playing field for all of its citizens.

The Women's reservation Bill was passed by the Rajya Sabha on 9 March 2010 by a majority vote of 186 members in favor and 1 against. It will now be forwarded to the Lok Sabha, and if passed there, would be implemented.

[edit]Religion based

The Tamil Nadu government has allotted 3.5% of seats each to Muslims and Christians, thereby altering the OBC reservation to 23% from 30% (since it excludes persons belonging to Other Backward Castes who are either Muslims or Christians).[13]

Andhra Pradesh's administration has introduced a law enabling 4% reservations for Muslims. (contested in court) Kerala Public Service Commission has a quota of 12% for Muslims. Religious minority status educational institutes also have 50% reservation for their particular religions. The Central government has listed a number of Muslim communities as backward Muslims, making them eligible for reservation.

[edit]Minorities based

Most of the minority institutions reserve a large number of seats (Sometimes up to 50%) for students of their religion. Jamia Milia Islamia (50% for Muslims), St. Stephens (50% for Christians) are two prime examples. Similarly most of the missionary schools and colleges (St. paul, St. xavier etc.)have de-facto reservation for Christian students.

[edit]State of domiciles

With few exceptions, all jobs under state government are reserved to those who are domiciles under that government. In Punjab Engineering College, Chandigarh, earlier 85% of seats were reserved for Chandigarh domiciles and now it is 50%. There are also some seat reserved for Jammu and Kashmir migrants in every Government aided educational institute

[edit]Undergraduate colleges

Institutes have a policy of reserving postgraduate seats for those who completed their undergraduation in said Institute. [AIIMS] used to reserve 33% of its 120 postgraduate seats for the 40 undergraduate students i.e. everyone who had completed MBBS in AIIMS was assured a postgraduate seat, which was judged illegal by a Court.

[edit]Other criteria

Some reservations are also made for:

  • Sons/Daughters/Grandsons/Granddaughters of Freedom Fighters.
  • Physically handicapped.
  • Sports personalities.
  • Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) have a small fraction of reserved seats in educational institutions. (Note : NRI reservations were removed from IIT in 2003).
  • Candidates sponsored by various organizations.
  • Those who have served in the armed forces (ex-serviceman quota).
  • Dependents of armed forces personnel killed in action.
  • Repatriates.
  • Reservation in special schools of Government Undertakings /PSUs meant for the children of their employees (e.g. Army schools, PSU schools, etc.).
  • Paid pathway reservations in places of worship (e.g. Tirupathi Balaji Temple, Tiruthani Murugan (Balaji) temple).
  • Seat reservation for Senior citizens/ PH in Public Bus transport.

[edit]Relaxations

In view of the fact that several of the top undergraduate and graduate institutions in India, such as the IITs, the IIMs are among the most selective in the world, it is not surprising that most reservation criteria are applied at the stage of entrance examinations for these institutions. Some of the criteria are relaxed for reserved categories, while others are completely eliminated. Examples include:

  1. The minimum high school marks criteria are relaxed for reserved seats.
  2. Age
  3. Fees, Hostel Room Rent etc.

It is important to note, however, that the criteria required to graduate from an institution are never relaxed.

[edit]Reservations in Colleges/Universities via Government Funding

There is a University Grants Commission (UGC) set up that provides financial assistance to Universities for the establishment of Special Cells for SC/STs. The purpose of these cells is to help Universities in implementing the reservation policy in the process of student admissions and staff recruitment at teaching and non teaching levels. It will also help the SC/ST categories integrate with the viewpoint of the university community and remove difficulties which they may have experienced. SC/ST cells like these have been set up in 109 Universities. The UCG provides financial assistance to Universities and affiliated Colleges for implementing the Special Cells. It provides the universities with assistance worth "Rs.1, 00,000/- per annum for:

  1. TA/DA for field work
  2. Data Collection
  3. Analysis and evaluation of statistical data
  4. Computer and Printer (once in a plan period)"

The UGC provides Financial Assistance only up to the end of the Xth Plan period. The work undertaken by the SC/ST Cells is reviewed at the end of Xth plan. The objective of the Xth plan is to ensure that there is an effective implementation of the reservation policy in admission, recruitment, allotment of staff quarters, Hostels etc. In short, it is to make sure that the SC/ST Cells are established in the Universities. [1]

[edit]Population data

Main articles: Scheduled Castes and Tribes, Other Backward Classes, and Forward Castes
**NFHS Survey estimated only Hindu OBC population.Total OBC population derived by assuming Muslim OBC population in same proportion as Hindu OBC population )
SC/ST
Only SC/ST population details are collected in Indian census. The SC/ST population is 24.4%.[14]
Other Backward Classes
After 1931,caste data is not collected for non SC/ST caste-groups in census. Mandal commission estimated OBC population based on 1931 census as 52%.There is an ongoing controversy about the estimation logic used by Mandal commission for calculating OBC population. Famous psephologist and researcher, Dr. Yogendra Yadav of the CSDS [who is a known votary of Affirmative Action] agrees that there is no empirical basis to the Mandal figure. According to him "It is a mythical construct based on reducing the number of SC/ST, Muslims and others and then arriving at a number."

National Sample Survey's 1999–2000 (NSS 99-00) round estimated around 36 per cent of the country's population is defined as belonging to the Other Backward Classes (OBC). The proportion falls to 32 per cent on excluding Muslim OBCs. A survey conducted in 1998 by National Family Health Statistics (NFHS) puts the proportion of non-Muslim OBCs as 29.8 per cent.[15] These surveys are considered as large by Oversight committee in its final report and by Dr. Yogendra Yadav. Oversight committee has used these surveys extensively in its final report.[3] State population of backward classes in NSS 99-00 can be found in other section of this article.


[edit]Arguments

This article does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2011)

There are several arguments provided both in support and in opposition to reservation. Some of the arguments on either side are often disputed by the other, while others are agreed upon by both sides, with a possible third solution proposed to accommodate both parties.

[edit]Arguments offered by supporters of reservation

Arguments offered by supporters of reservation

1. More than a thousand years of discrimination has laid barren groups of people without education, hygienic and healthy living. People who were not given education could now sense a freedom that could come up to them. But then, they are not ready for the new responsibilities. At the dawn of independence and even before, forward looking leaders could see that the country could not progress unless the masses consisting primarily of these people could progress. Even today, the growing GDP has really no impact on the people who are going hungry to bed every night.

2. If 60 years of reservation could be so difficult to withstand and could make life miserable for the so-called forward classes, imagine what 1000 years of subversion with absolutely no choice and absolutely no voice, would have done to a human race.

3. The government at the time of independence could bring in only reservations on the education front and in a majority of the government offices. This does not have any significance beyond certain levels in government offices, military and other areas of work. Similarly, it does not have any significance when it comes to private industry which is the largest employer today. Contrast this with the affirmative action in other countries, say UK for instance. The population racial spread should match with the industry spread. That is to say, if the race is occupying 30% of the population, the same set or about the same percentage of people should be in every industry such as banking, media, etc., at all levels of management. If a company, be it private or public, if for any reason or not finding themselves in line with this concept will have to pay an additional tax to the government. Please see ethnic quotas in the UK's affirmative action bill.

4. It has never been possible for India to bring any standard reservation policy with a clear cut end marked out. This is so because, people who are anti to reservations and who occupy the top positions in the hierarchy are not allowing census to be taken on a caste basis. Secondly, data pertaining to caste wise hierarchical data is not specifically made available for public consumption. The current census looks forward to make good this lacuna at last.

5. Reservations can end only when the population map of the castes match with the caste wise industry map. That is if a specific group forms 12% of the population, then they should be occupying more or less the same percentage in, say, banks at all levels, in top management map, middle management map and in lower levels as well. Only then, it can be said that equality has reached. Instead if you take media today, be it government or otherwise, one would only find the upper class domination and naturally, no other idea gets spread as well.

6.There is a general perception that the quality of education is compromised when reservations are in place. But there are many instances where it has been disproved. In India, particularly, there has been mushrooming of education institutions across the country. Where there were only 2000 seats in a state (Tamil Nadu Engineering in 1970s), now offers more than 100,000 seats for similar programs. Even with reservations, the number of seats for forward caste students and for others have increased by more than 50 times. But still, upper castes remark of insufficiency of seats to the upper castes! This is happening all over the country. The same is the case with government jobs.

7.Poor people from "forward castes" do not have any social or economical advantage over rich people from backward caste.

Counter Point: Reservation is a tool to improve representation. It is not a poverty alleviation program.

8.Providing quotas on the basis of an accident of birth and not on the basis of competitive merit will be discriminatory to talented students, and weaken the country's competitive edge.

Counter Point: Merit is an abstract notion and a social construct.

9.This policy of the government has already caused increase in brain drain and may aggravate further. Under graduates and graduates will start moving to foreign universities for higher education.

Counter Point: Upper caste Indians were well known for the immigration pattern even before the dusk of the British Raj. Celebration of golden jubilee of IIT was celebrated in San Jose, California not because the they couldn't make it to the IIT but only after there graduation. In contrast Tamil diaspora to nations like Malaysia and Singapore at the end of the Slave trade was made possible due to the suppression of this population as lower caste and their look for greener pastures.


Therefore, reservations are a political necessity in India because vast influential sections of voting population see reservations as beneficial to themselves. All governments have supported maintaining and/or increasing reservations. Since there is a wide spread support to reservations, even if the governments are not sincere about the purpose of the reservations, they make it appear as if they are for reservations. And this has been happening in this country resulting in a half-hearted implementation of reservations that has not produced any worthwhile results even after 60 years of implementation.


Reservations are legal and binding. As shown by Gujjar agitations (Rajasthan, 2007–2008), increasing reservations is also essential for peacekeeping in India.

Quality of education and quality of government service has fallen not because of reservations but because weak leadership and management capability and a systemic failure of government machinery which does not know how to manage its own staff. A bad policy in the initial years when the government instead of being a servant of the public turned to be the biggest employer in the country, resulting in gross under employment and mismanagement. That weakened the system and therefore, service quality.


One of the biggest difference of affirmative actions in the west and that of the Indian Government is that the people who suppressed the others never acknowledged the same. In the west, whites acknowledged that they are subjecting the blacks to mistreatment and slavery and that this has resulted in a situation that where the growth of blacks have been affected. In India, till today, never have the leaders of the forward castes ever expressed any apology for 2500 years of suppression. Nor have they expressed that these suppressed castes should be brought up for the growth of the country. Even if any one makes such a statement, it is more a lip service than real concern. There has never been a Lincoln in India who would take guns against his own race or caste to fight for the freedom of the oppressed.

Affirmative Action schemes are in place in many countries including USA, South Africa, Malaysia, Brazil etc. It was researched in Harvard University that Affirmative Action programmes are beneficial to the under-privileged.The studies said that Blacks who enter elite institutions with lower test scores and grades than those of whites achieve notable success after graduation. They earn advanced degrees at rates identical to those of their white classmates. They are even slightly more likely than whites from the same institutions to obtain professional degrees in law, business and medicine. They become more active than their white classmates in civic and community activities.

Affirmative Action has helped many - if not everyone from under-privileged and/or under-represented communities to grow and occupy top positions in the world's leading industries. (See the Section on Tamil Nadu) Reservation in education is not THE solution, it is just one of the many solutions. Reservations is a means to increase representation of hitherto under-represented caste groups and thereby improve diversity on campus.

Reservations are needed to provide social justice to the most marginalized and underprivileged is our duty and their human right. Reservation will really help these marginalized people to lead successful lives, thus eliminating caste-based discrimination which is still widely prevalent in India especially in the rural areas. (about 60% of Indian population stays in Villages)

Anti-reservationists have made a gross mix-up between brain-drain and reservation. Brain-drain is mainly attributed to the "want" to become more rich very fast. Even if we assume that reservation could be a fraction of the cause, one must understand that brain-drain is a concept which is meaningless without nationalism, which is separatism from humankind as a whole. If people leave the country whining about reservation, they don't have enough nationalism and brain-drain does not apply to them.

There are concerns among anti-reservationists about meritrocracy and aptly so. But meritrocracy is meaningless without equality. First all people must be brought to the same level, whether it elevates a section or delevels another, regardless of merit. After that, we can talk about merit. Forward pople have never known to go backward due to reservations or lack of "meritrocracy". Reservations have only slowed down the process of "Forward becoming more richer and backward becoming more poorer". In China, people are equal by birth. In Japan, everyone is highly qualified, so a qualified man finishes his work fast and comes for labour work for which one gets paid more. So the forward people must be at least happy with the fact that they are white-collared throughout their life.

The current idea of meritocracy is highly indignant. Merit today is scoring high marks in an examination and education system that is best described, insipid. Educationists have grown to see that one cannot train or educate every one the same way. And every education system should find out what is the person good at and educate him accordingly. A sweeping education system which does not differentiate the requirement of an artist and that of an engineer cannot be called the right education. Meritocracy based on such an education system cannot be called the ultimate guide to identifying the good, bad and the ugly.

Though its true that poverty exists among the people of the so-called higher caste too,but their poverty is only economic poverty,and still they are at par with society.Whereas people from the so-called backward caste are not only economically poor but also socially backwards.Still untouchability and caste based discrimination is rampant in India,especially is Villages.And 60% of India is rural based.


1000yrs ago, castes were created and continued till now. And due to this people from backward castes were ill treated and exploited to the point of untouchability which still exists now. They were not allowed inside educational institutions nor inside the places of worship(Temples).They were forcibly cut off from mainstream of the society.Various restrictions were imposed on them and were deemed as lower caste and subhuman.For further reference,take a look at Caste system in India

To understand this better take a hypothetical example of a family-:

If a person is cruelly ill-treated and badly exploited and rendered untouchable,then that person obviously lags behind in the race of success and better life style,as he was never allowed to get education nor was he allowed to enter the temple,nor allowed to use the same well for water,and many such restrictions imposed on him,which resulted in his being cut off from the main section of the society.The same was imposed on his family too.Due to such restrictions and oppression,he wouldn't be able to give a better life to his children.Obviously he would fail to do so because if he spent all his lifetime toiling hard for other people of so-called higher section of the society for negligible wages and due to the oppression had to be trodden under huge debt.So his children and grandchildren faced the same discrimination by the society and this cycle continues for many generations of that family.Continuous discrimination and ill treatment to the generations of that family would generally make them backward and create a huge gap between them and the rest of the society.So obviously they would be poor and backward and cut off from the main section of the society,because they would have never known what is it to have a life with the kind of benefits that the remaining families of the society enjoy.

Suddenly one day,this discrimination is made illegal by law but still it remained in the people's psyche.And then the current generation of that family are told that discrimination is made illegal now by law and that now they can compete with others but how could they compete as they have never been provided with the kind of facilities that their other competitors had.Obviously they would lag behind because they never had the same facility which others had,not only financially but also socially.So now the equality given to that family becomes meaningless,because they are struggling hard for just two square meals.So this equality meant nothing to them even to the brightest of their lot because they were busy struggling for basic amenities.

So they lag behind inspite of the equality given because a history of discrimination has made the family poor and cut off from the mainstream of the society.So they lag behind and could not make any use of the equality given to them by law.So for their benefit,special chances were given to bring the family into mainstream and some members of that family struggled hard and made only one of their son educated now.But still he could not go far as the social barriers still existed and alone he could not go far due to the poverty and social backwardness that still existed in his family. So to make sure that if some members of that family join the mainstream then maybe then they can be uplifted.So special provisions were made till maximum members of that family comes forward and join the mainstream of the society.And when maximum members join the mainstream of the society then that special provision would be cut off.


This hypothetical example explains the reason and cause for the special provisions for the people from the backward caste.The situation of the hpothetical family shown in the example is the reality of the of the so-called backward section of the society.To remove this discrimination,and to bring them at par with the rest of the society,special provisions for them is a necessity.

[edit]Arguments offered by anti-reservationists

  • Allocating quotas is a form of discrimination which is contrary to the right to equality.
  • There is great confusion in the "pro-reservation camp". While they clamour for 33% reservation for women in parliament and state legislatures [and do not accept caste quotas as part of women's quotas], they do not want special consideration for women in quotas in higher education. This is implicit acceptance of the fact that there are multiple factors of exclusion and discrimination at work in society.
  • The policy of reservation has never been subject to a widespread social or political audit. Before extending reservation to more groups, the entire policy needs to be properly examined, and its benefits over a span of nearly 60 years have to be gauged.
  • Providing quotas on the basis of an accident of birth and not on the basis of competitive merit will be discriminatory to talented students, and weaken the country's competitive edge.
  • Poor people from "forward castes" do not have any social or economical advantage over rich people from backward caste.
  • Combination of factors like Wealth, Income, Occupation etc. will help to identify real needy people. Most often, only the economically sound people make use of most of the seats reserved for "backward" castes, thus making the aim a total failure[25].

Quoting reservations as a reason for growth of Tamil Nadu & other southern states is not logical. Growth can come only by increasing capacity and improving infrastructure whereas Reservation only divides existing available resources. Reservation in Tamil Nadu has existed for 85 years, but the progress rate has gone up only for the last 20 years).[22] This could be easily attributed to Mid-day meals (which increased primary school enrollment), liberalization of higher education (the number of engineering colleges has gone up from 11 to 250), and IT revolution providing new job opportunities. All these happened in the last 20-25 years synonymous with its progress history. Gujarat, Haryana, Maharastra and Punjab were able to prosper even without exorbitant reservations for decades together like Tamil Nadu. States with high percentage of reservation does not show any significant growth difference in comparison with states which does not follow high% of reservation.

  • There is fear that reservation once introduced will never be withdrawn even if there is a proof for upliftment of Backward classes, due to political issues. For example, in Tamil Nadu, forward castes were able to secure only 3% of total seats (and 9% in Open Competition) in professional institutions at Undergraduate level as against their population percentage of 13%.[26]. This is a clear case of reverse discrimination.
  • Many cite the Mandal Commission report while supporting the idea of reservations. According to the Mandal commission, 52% of the Indians belong to OBC category, whle according to National Sample Survey 1999-2000, this figure is only 36% (32% excluding Muslim OBCs)[27].
  • This policy of the government has already caused increase in brain drain [23] and may aggravate further. Under graduates and graduates will start moving to foreign universities for higher education.


Based on NSS 99-00. NSS calculated Rural & Urban BC's separately. Weighting for Rural and Urban applied statewise as in the 2001 census. Backward castes can also compete in Open competition apart from 27% exclusive reservation India is a country with BC Population ranging from 1% in some North Eastern states to 66% in Tamil Nadu with many major states below 27%. Applying 27% reservation in central educational institutions all over India will deprive chances of other sections of population greatly. Already SC/ST reservation is available in all states equivalent to their population percentage. In Many Major states like Punjab, West Bengal, Haryana, Maharastra etc. Forward castes students admitted will be much less than their population in Reservation Era even if they secure 100% seats in Open competition. Reference chart given. Possible solution: As claimed by some states (incidentally Tamil Nadu, which is the center of the argument of in the reservation issue, being the first to state its claim) a Federal Republic system of government may be more suited for a varied and diverse nation like India.



[edit]See also

[edit]References

  1. ^ a b c University Grants Commission. "Financial Support". University Grants Commission. UGC- Apex body of the government of India. Retrieved 20 October 2011.
  2. ^ Chhatrapati Shahu Maharaj."Shri Chhatrapati Shahu Maharaj". History. Bahujan Samaj Party. Retrieved 20 October 2011.
  3. ^ "The Untouchables of India". Praxis. Retrieved 20 October 2011.
  4. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m RETHINKING RESERVATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION IN INDIA Laskar, Mehbubul Hassan. "ETHINKING RESERVATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION IN INDIA". ILI Law Review.
  5. ^ a b Constitution of India
  6. ^ a b Bhattacharya, Amit. "Who are the OBCs?". Archived from the original on 27 June 2006. Retrieved 2006-04-19. Times of India, 8 April 2006.
  7. ^ a b Ramaiah, A (6 June 1992). "Identifying Other Backward Classes" (PDF). Economic and Political Weekly. pp. 1203–1207. Archived from the original on 30 December 2005. Retrieved 2006-05-27.
  8. ^ Srinivasan, K; Srinivasan, P (2005). "Caste Affiliations among Hindus and non-Hindus, and Poverty in Four States of India: An Empirical Analysis". Demography India 34 (1).
  9. ^ "New Cutoff for OBCs". The Telegraph. 11 April 2008. Retrieved 2008-04-11.
  10. ^ www.savebrandindia.org
  11. ^ IndianExpress.com :: Court, quota and cream
  12. ^ Supreme Court Judgement Ashoka Kumar Thakur vs. Union of India
  13. ^ Viswanathan, S. (2007-11-16). "A step forward". Frontline 24 (22)..
  14. ^ "Population". Registrar General & Census Commissioner, India. Archived from the original on 26 May 2006. Retrieved 2006-05-27.
  15. ^ "36% population is OBC, not 52%". South Asian Free Media Association. 8 May 2006. Retrieved 2006-05-27.

[edit]External links

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

तकलीफ़ क्या हैं ये मुझे बताइये , शर्त हैं लेकिन पहले मुस्कराइये । गांठ सारे खुद ही  खुल जाएंगे , शर्त हैं लेकिन नाकाब तो हटाइये । आपकी तन्हाई दूर हो जायेगी , शर्त हैं लेकिन पहले हाथ तो बढाइये । Copyright@Sankalp Mishra
Read more

कवि मरता नहीं हैं

कवि मरता नहीं हैं , कवि को मरना भी नहीं चाहिए , तब भी नहीं जब साँसे रुक जाए , तब भी नहीं जब साँसे चल रही हो , कवि हमेशा जिन्दा रहता हैं , शब्दों में , आपके दिलों में , खेत- खलिहानों में , बाज़ार में , दूकान में , आपके मकान में आपके पलंग पर , आपके तकिये के नीचे , आपके उस फूल में जो प्रेमिका को देते हैं , उस गाली में जो मज़दूरों को देते हैं , कवि हमेशा जिन्दा रहता हैं , कवि मरता  नहीं हैं । कवि जिन्दा रहता हैं , माँ के क्रंदन में , बच्चे के किलकारी में , युवा के आक्रोश में  , बुजुर्ग के अफ़सोस में , आपके उल्लास में , आपके टीस में , आपके सपने में , आपके यात्रा में , आपके गंतव्य में , कवि जिन्दा रहता हैं , कवि मरता नहीं हैं । कवि जिन्दा रहता हैं , उस आवाज में जो सत्ता के खिलाफ होता हैं , अहंकार और  नाकाबिलियात के खिलाफ होता हैं , उस आवाज में जो गूंगी जनता बोलती हैं , उस आवाज में जो ताकतवर सुनना चाहते है , उस आवाज में जो दबाई जाती हैं , उस आवाज में भी जो पतंग पर चढाई जाती हैं  , उस आवाज में जो शहरों के शोर में दब जाता हैं , उस आवाज में...
Read more