(This article is Part II of a three-part series. Part I & Part III)
From 1947 to 1967, in the absence of codified reservations, appointments to government jobs were made by the government departments themselves, without advertising the vacancies, or by the Recruitment Boards, where established. In their own wisdom, these bodies considered the socio-economic status of the candidates and their respective domicile areas while finalising selections and nominations.
Entry into government services was used to gain political legitimacy after the 1953 era, fully supported by the Union Government. The recruitment to gazetted posts was initially conducted through the successor forum of the pre-partition State Agency and from 1957 by the J&K Public Service Commission.
Following the recommendations of the P B Gajindergadkar Commission, the State Government, via order No 252-GD of 1969 dated February 3, 1969, appointed a committee headed by J.N. Wazir, retired Chief Justice of J&K High Court, to identify Backward Classes in the state based on their social and educational backwardness.
Acting on the Wazir Committee's recommendations, the State Government formulated the J&K Scheduled Castes & Backward Classes (Reservation) Rules 1970 and the J&K Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes Reservation (Appointment by Promotion) Rules 1970. These rules were challenged in the Apex Court in WP Nos 175, 359 & 360 of 1979 titled Janki Prasad Parimoo and others v/s The State of J&K and others. The court identified defects in the impugned rules, declaring them unenforceable until rectified.
In compliance with this decision, a committee under the chairmanship of Justice Dr Adarsh Sen Anand was constituted under government order No 540-GR of 1976 dated 24.08.1976 to address the drawbacks highlighted by the Apex Court along with other related matters.
Diverging from the Wazir Committee's focus on social and educational paradigms, the Anand Committee included economic indicators while determining backwardness to identify classes or sections thereof as backward.
Anand Committee's recommendations led to a paradigm shift in the identification of socially and educationally backward classes by adopting an area-specific approach based on social, educational, and economic indicators.
Consequently, all genuine residents, irrespective of caste in an area or village declared backward, became eligible for reservations, including those residing in areas adjoining the Line of Actual Control, subject to fulfilling prescribed conditions.
The subsequent acceptance of the Anand Committee report saw the Deputy Commissioners and Directorate of Economics and Statistics tasked with verification responsibilities based on fresh representations.
A significant number of areas or villages were notified as backward areas, along with additional caste-based classes, by the Backward Classes Commissions from 1993 (K.K. Gupta-led Commission) onwards.
These commissions have consistently recommended the inclusion of new areas or villages as backward without considering the exclusion of areas or villages that no longer qualify as backward. Similarly, other categories, whether areas within the Line of Actual Control or other social castes have remained unchanged.
The Supreme Court recently upheld the decision of the Madras High Court that struck down the 10.5% internal quota for Vanniyars within the most backward classes of Tamil Nadu under the Act of 2021, citing the use of "antiquated data".
In the absence of a proper survey based on criteria akin to those adopted by the Mandal Commission, all additions made by the government based on the recommendations of government departments and Backward Classes Commissions are unlikely to withstand judicial scrutiny, if challenged.
The modicum of neutrality and autonomy once associated with the predecessors of the current Commission has now vanished, as evidenced by the castes and areas it has recommended for designation as Social Castes and backward areas, respectively. Jogi and Nath, known as drum beaters, Dubdaby Brahman and Achariyas, who serve as priests performing rites on various occasions, and Goda Brahman, who conduct marriage ceremonies and havans, along with Badara (guilders of utensils) and Bojra (beggars for food and clothes), have been classified as OBC without comparative assessments of their counterparts in other religious communities.
A notable example is the Jats, who, by no stretch of the imagination, are socially and economically backward, yet have been notified as such. The approach of the existing BCC has been narrowly focused on specific communities rather than being holistic and based on a proper survey.
In a series of decisions and the enactment of other laws leading to over-centralization, the power of the States to identify backward classes has been stripped away under the Constitution (One Hundred Second) Amendment Act of 2021."
SC’s, STs & Concerns
The Constitution (Jammu & Kashmir) Scheduled Castes Order 1956 marked the beginning of codified reservations in the erstwhile state. Compared to Scheduled Tribes (STs), the Scheduled Castes (SCs) have continuously enjoyed the benefits of reservations for the last 68 years. They are now adequately represented in almost all organs of the Union Territory, proportionate to their population.
However, out of the 13 castes notified in 1956, a few have not benefited from reservations due to poverty, which prevents them from accessing available educational opportunities.
It is crucial to gather quantifiable data to draw conclusions about the adequacy of representation held in government jobs by each of the 13 castes, and those found with an inadequate share should be categorised separately, and entitled to a separate quota proportionate to their population and disparities.
Under The Constitution (Jammu and Kashmir) Scheduled Tribes Order 1989, twelve tribes and sub-tribes, mostly residents of the districts of Leh and Kargil, were notified as Scheduled Tribes concerning the state of J&K for the Constitution of India.
The non-inclusion of Gujjar and Bakarwal communities led to significant unrest in the state, highlighting the Union Government's lopsided approach. The beginning of the 1990s saw an uprising in significant parts of the state, and the Union Government realised the dangers of leaving the Gujjar and Bakarwal communities in a state of antagonism.
In response, the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Orders (Amendment) Ordinance 1991 declared Gujjar and Bakarwal, among others in the State of Karnataka, as Scheduled Tribes. This was followed by another order in 8/1991 that also included the "Gaddi" and "Sippi" communities. The groundwork for the eligibility of these communities was laid by the report of the Special Socio-Economic Survey conducted in J&K in 1987 by the State Census Organisation.
(*The author is a retired IAS officer, former Chairman of the J&K Public Service Commission, and Advocate at Srinagar.)
-----
Have you liked the news article?