OBC Quota : Government Order : ஓ பி சி அரசு ஆணை

 

Tamil Nadu’s ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) and the State government played the role of a driving force in the long road which culminated in the Supreme Court’s validation of OBC quota for NEET All India Quota (AIQ) seats in medical admissions on Thursday.

Appearing before a Bench led by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, senior advocate P. Wilson, who appeared for the DMK, said the court’s judgment would go a long way in the fight for social equality.

The narrative which led to the prolonged legal battle began with the enactment of the Constitution (Ninety-Third Amendment) Act of 2005 which inserted clause (5) to Article 15 to empower the State to make special provisions (including reservation) for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes (or the OBCs) relating to their admission in educational institutions.

The Supreme Court followed this up by holding that reservation was permissible in the AIQ seats for SC/ST categories.

The Parliament then passed the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admissions) Act of 2006 to provide reservation for students belonging to the SCs, STs and OBCs in central educational institutions. However, reservation for OBCs was not extended to State-contributed seats for the AIQ in State-run institutions.

But Tamil Nadu went ahead to grant 50% reservation to the OBCs in State-run medical institutions under the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Seats in Educational Institutions and of Appointments or Posts in the Services under the State) Act, 1993. Thus, the State quota seats were being filled according to the provisions of the Act of 1993.

A writ petition was instituted before the Supreme Court by the DMK, represented by Mr. Wilson, seeking a mandamus to provide OBC reservation in the AIQ. But the party was asked to take its case to the Madras High Court in June 2020.

In the High Court, the DMK argued that AIQ seats available in State-run medical and dental institutions in Tamil Nadu ought to follow the reservation policy as applicable under the Act of 1993.

However, the Madras High Court deferred the case, saying it had to be heard by the Supreme Court where a similar issue was pending. Back in the Supreme Court, on July 13, 2020, the petitions were disposed on the ground that the issue raised in the High Court was different from the one pending with the top court.

Finally, the High Court, on July 27, 2020, held there were no legal or constitutional impediments in extending reservation to OBCs in the AIQ seats in the medical colleges in Tamil Nadu. The High Court had then directed the Union government to constitute an expert committee for implementing reservation for OBCs in the seats surrendered by Tamil Nadu in the AIQ. However, the High Court had observed that the reservation should be implemented only from the academic year 2021-2022 since it would disturb the selection process that had been set into motion for the academic year of 2020-2021. The State of Tamil Nadu challenged the order in Supreme Court, which upheld the High Court’s decision.

Meanwhile, the Centre set up an expert committee to determine the modalities of granting reservation to OBC candidates in the AIQ seats in UG and PG courses in state-run medical colleges within Tamil Nadu from the academic year 2021-2022.

But the DMK filed a contempt petition before the Madras High Court against the Union for non-implementation of OBC reservation in AIQ seats.

However, the Centre issued its notice of July 29, 2021 to implement 27% OBC reservation (non-creamy layer) and 10% EWS reservation in the 15% UG and 50% PG AIQ seats in the current academic session of 2021-22.

The Supreme Court, on January 7 this year, upheld the constitutional validity of the OBC reservation in AIQ medical and dental UG and PART B 10 PG seats. The constitutionality of the criteria used for the identification of the EWS category is yet to be decided.

 

The Tamil Nadu government had earlier, too, opposed the Union government’s plan to include the salary of parents to determine the ‘creamy layer’ among the OBC category for reservations.

The DMK government has issued an order to all district collectors of Tamil Nadu, asking them to not take into account the agricultural income and wages of families from Other Backward Class (OBC) while issuing caste certificates. The order reinforces the Tamil Nadu government’s staunch opposition to the Union government’s plan to include agricultural income and salaries as part of ‘family income’ to determine the ‘creamy layer’ of the OBC community.

The new order states that the Tamil Nadu government has released the list of OBC caste groups as announced by the Union government. It also pointed out that the Union government has issued guidelines to exclude people falling under the ‘creamy layer’ (or socially advanced) from the OBC general quota reservations. However, the state government has announced that while calculating the parents’ income for separating the ‘creamy layer’ students, monthly salary and earnings through farming should not be factored in.

Currently, the individuals from the OBC category are eligible for 27% reservation in civil posts and services and for admissions in educational institutions. These vacant posts are filled through direct recruitment. However, this is not applicable to the ‘creamy layer’ of the OBC category, which includes families that earn more than Rs 8 lakh per annum. The income limit is one of the criteria that the Union government has set to determine who is categorised as ‘creamy layer’ and excluded from reservations.

Per the current rules, OBC families with an income of less than Rs 8 lakh per annum will be eligible for the reservations. Those with an annual income of Rs 8 lakh and above will not be eligible for the OBC benefits. This does not include revenue from agriculture or landholdings. Besides, persons from the OBC category holding Class-A positions in the government sectors are also included in the ‘creamy layer’ category.

 

The income limit, which is revised every three years, was set at Rs 1 lakh per annum in 1993. It was last revised in 2017, from Rs 6 lakh to Rs 8 lakh per annum. In February 2020, the Union government proposed raising the income ceiling from Rs 8 lakh to Rs 12 lakh, and including all taxable salaries when calculating the annual income to determine the ‘creamy layer’ status, according to a report in the Print.

Last year, the Parliamentary standing committee on Welfare of Backward Classes had recommended raising the income ceiling for ‘creamy layer’ of the OBC category to Rs 15 lakh. However, the Parliamentary panel, chaired by BJP MP Ganesh Singh, recommended excluding the salary and agricultural revenue while calculating the annual income.

The previous AIADMK government as well as the current DMK government opposed using incomes to determine the ‘creamy layer.’ In a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi in July 2020, MK Stalin had said that the economic factor was “against the spirit of reservation” and asked the Union government to retain Tamil Nadu’s existing policy (not factoring in income) on determining the ‘creamy layer’ of OBC as is.

In his letter, CM Stalin had also argued that including salary as part of income to determine the ‘creamy layer’ of OBC ignores the caste barriers that continue to exist for marginalised communities. Stalin highlighted that reservations were not about economic inequality but about social disadvantage. It is because of this, he wrote, that the economic factor never found a mention in our Constitution when it came to reservations.

Former Chief Minister Edappadi K Palaniswamy, too, had argued that if salary and agricultural income of parents are considered as overall income of parents, it would deprive many deserving candidates of the OBC status and deny them reservation to government jobs and welfare schemed under the Union government.