Dear judiciary, we need you to understand caste-based discrimination.
This is in reference to the recent Supreme Court verdict dated January 22 2019, not allowing Special Leave Petition filed in response to the Allahabad High Court judgment on a mathematical 13-point roster dated April 7 2017 which directed all universities and colleges to implement the existing reservation policy by treating the department or subject as a unit rather than the university or college as it is.
When the department is taken as a unit, then at least one appointment from each reserved category will be made only when a minimum of 14 appointments are made (known as the 13-point roster). However, when the university or college is taken as a unit, every reserved category gets the earmarked percentage of reservation when a minimum of 200 appointments are made (known as the 200-point roster).
The advantage of the 200-point roster over the 13-point roster is that deficiency in reservation in one department is compensated by other departments.
Disparity in presence of various groups in higher education system represents the failure of a nation as egalitarian and just, which is our constitutional goal. India as a nation is based on fraternity.
Fraternity requires justice not only in a procedural sense but also in substance. Social mobility and affirmative action is linked and they are a medium to make this country more inclusive. But, the recent judgment can be a hindrance in achieving it.
Arguments on merit are always dependent on a larger comprehensive principle of justice and the judiciary may choose to take initiative in defining justice in this case. It’s not only a legal question but also a political and moral one. It is time to address structural issues and improve it.
Our judiciary needs to acknowledge the fact that caste-based discrimination is still prevalent in the education system. The judgement may be technically right and liberally interpreted but it is definitely not progressive according to the current socio-economic system existing in India.
The Indian judiciary has been known for its progressive and transformative role and it is time for them to assert their role in making a nation where everyone gets a fair chance to contribute to society.
As our great freedom fighters, political parties and politicians consciously understood that caste-based discrimination is the root of most problems in India, now the judiciary needs to understand. I am not saying that the judiciary has not recognized it but it is important to acknowledge that today, caste is prevalent at the ground level. Last year’s SC/ST prevention judgment followed by the recent verdict of the Supreme Court does not bode well for Indian society.
The 13-point roster is totally in contradiction to the contemporary situation of the Indian higher education system. It is more or less dominated by the upper castes of India. We need improvisation but the 13-point roster is regressive in nature and will not aid improvement.
The higher education scenario is that unreserved quota is deemed to be reserved for upper caste. A well-known Indian scholar Bhanu Pratap Mehta has described the same. First is the type who gets reservation constitutionally and the second type is Brahmanical reservation for those who belong to the Brahmin caste.
The present situation of higher education is systematically facing the problem of Bhai-Bhateeja-Vaad and Chaaplus-Vaad. The 13-point roster will surely aggravate these kinds of practices.
Conclusively, justice is not possible without reservation. We need to understand that in the appointment of faculty, merit-based appointments need inclusion in reserved quotas to do complete justice. There is no meritorious rationality without giving clear reservation in India. The 13-point roster systemically violates this principle.
The idea of a university is fundamentally against the 13-point roster. A university needs to be inclusive and open for marginalised classes. The judgment is prima facie putting a restraint on entry and discriminating against thousands of youths belonging to lower castes as well as those who have completed their higher education degree. The system needs to open doors of universities and higher education for members of SC, ST, OBC and other minority classes.
The first-generation higher educated youth belonging to backward communities have a responsibility to educate their people and the coming generations. This initial restraint on their entry level will have far sighted effects on generations to come. Our policies should be more inclusive on this aspect.
However, on the grounds of principle, I am against the roster system in Indian higher education. The appointment procedure should be centralized (like the UPSC) in the appointment of teaching faculties. There is no straightjacket formula for reservation in India. The 200-roster point is only a temporary solution for rational and logical appointments. If we consider relatively smaller units as units of appointment then transparent appointments are not possible.
So, temporary justice needs a strong intervention of legislature. A regulation of 200-point roster in the university is needed through ordinance. The 13-point roster needs to be done away with.
Also, it’s high time that the legislature thinks of establishing the National Teachers Appointment Commission in India as a constitutional body.
Let the marginalised live their life with dignity according to procedure established by law.