Caste complications have influenced the political discourses of India since the inception of a semblance of reformative restitution. More recently, the Bihar Caste Census has again provided fuel to the already burning fire of the demand to conduct a nationwide caste survey. The revelation of the OBCs and EBCs together comprising about 63 per cent of Bihar’s total population has led to deliberations on re-evaluating reservation quotas as per revised and updated demographic compositions. On the other hand, voices recounting the abject failures of caste-based reservations grow more veracious every day. While the communities who have derived their fair share of privileges insist upon exploiting the system for their convenience, the gap widens even further between those in need of upliftment and those already enjoying substantial benefits. This dynamic exacerbates social and economic disparities, leaving marginalized communities further behind. A popular narrative runs in the veins of political realists, that of reservations never-ending, at least unanimously. And this is the crux of the matter, of a nation having the willpower to not let a welfare scheme turn into a social menace.

With the opposition alliance mounting pressure on the ruling BJP government to reinvigorate their regional vote-bank politics while simultaneously undermining Narendra Modi’s homogenizing brand of Hindutva welfarism, there seems no end to the political manoeuvring of this sensitive issue. However, the need of the hour is to address this issue by way of policies that ensure equitable distribution of resources and opportunities, targeting assistance to those who need it the most and curbing the excesses of hijackers. This article advocates in favour of a change in the existing manner of reservations being extended, explores the future of caste census and reservations in India, and makes recommendations, proposing a way forward based on socio-economic realities.

Historical Context

Caste divisions prevalent in Indian society are overwhelmingly complex as they are not based on a definitive formula. The debate on the assortment of classes and according of assistance is hardly new. The earliest difficulties in enumeration started in the 1880s during the pre-colonial times when the British attempted to devise a classification scheme along the lines of birth, function and occupation. To their disgruntlement, these three aspects intermingled and intertwined amongst themselves to create a perfectly untouchable and obscure hierarchy that was neither discardable at the onset nor laudable in its complexity. Foreigners as they were, they went for the next best thing that was intelligible to them and formalized the caste structure in India as per the four-fold Varna system which divided the society into Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras. This faulty system of oversimplification gave birth to obstacles that plague policymaking even in contemporary times. This was because caste divisions were rigid but the identities were fluid, there were discrepancies between the so-called socially assigned community roles and actual administrative categories. Numerous sub-castes did not fit neatly into the Varnas. To sum up, bluntly, the Varna system did not work then as it does not work now.

The calculation of caste data was too tiresome an affair for even the colonial overlords to keep up with. The 1941 Census was not accompanied by caste data publication with the British terming it “an enormous and costly table”. The British administration was also concerned about the potential backlash and tensions arising from caste-based data given its inaccuracies. However, the narrative of modern caste complexities historically rooted in colonial imposition is simplistic and not entirely true, being braided with both colonial and indigenous agencies. This was highlighted by Nicholas Dirk who critically examined the role of Indian intermediaries in the British administration’s classification of caste and their pivotal role in the solidification and perpetuation of caste hierarchies. Dirk argued that these intermediaries- local elites, scholars, and informants, motivated by personal gain, social prestige, or political influence, often provided the British with a skewed or exaggerated picture of caste identities and hierarchies. This manipulation contributed to the entrenchment and institutionalization of caste divisions which were then used to justify and implement colonial administrative practices. Consequently, the seemingly ‘objective’ classifications produced by the British were heavily influenced by these intermediaries, leading to a legacy of caste complexity that persists in contemporary India.

The harsh reality Indians faced at that time was that their involvement was far from innocuous in this matter; they were not passive recipients of colonial policies but active participants in shaping and reinforcing the complex caste system. This led to a growing awareness and demand for social reform in India in the late 19th Century, with reformers and social leaders beginning to advocate for the upliftment of marginalized castes, particularly the Dalits (formerly referred to as “Untouchables”). This period saw the rise of movements and leaders like B.R. Ambedkar, who championed the cause of social justice and equality. Thereafter, the integration of marginalized communities into mainstream society began, with Mysore introducing reservations in education and government jobs for backward communities in 1921 and Madras and Bombay following soon after. The 1932 Poona Pact was the culmination of the extension of reservation to electoral politics with Mahatma Gandhi’s unrelenting fast to support the system of reserved seats (in which the candidature would be reserved for backward communities but not voting) and Dr Ambedkar’s defeated abandoning of the separate electorates system (in which both the representation and voting would be reserved for the backward communities).

Mahatma Gandhi’s wariness of the future deepening of caste segregation arising out of separate electorates ultimately led to the enshrinement of the principles of the Poona Pact in the Government of India Act, 1935, and later the Indian Constitution with:

• Article 15 (4) enables the State to make special provisions for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes;

• Article 15 (5) empowers the State to make accommodations for admissions into educational institutions including private aided or unaided institutions for any educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes; and

• Article 46 calls for the promotion of the educational and economic interests of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and other weaker sections and their protection from social injustice and exploitation.

Through this rough outlining, we come to terms with the past decisions and policies that have significantly shaped current debates on caste-based reservations. These policies laid the groundwork for caste-based reservations, but their historical context and implementation continue to influence and complicate the present efficacy and fairness of such reservations, reflecting ongoing challenges in balancing social justice with the legacy of past classifications.

Present Challenges

In hindsight, Dr Ambedkar’s apprehension of Gandhian directive principles alone proving insufficient for the upliftment of backward classes was farsighted. Caste-based reservations have now become a weaponized tool for coaxing the masses into a distorted form of political obedience even though the initial goal was to exercise social welfarism. Instead of focusing on policy formulations, the consequential scene in India has been fixated on numbers and outcomes because of vote-bank politics. So much so that it has become India’s greatest irony that defining and reserving benefits as per caste considerations is the policy solution to achieve the end goal of caste annihilation. Even then, it has failed to deliver the desired results with a small economically better-off section among the backward communities taking maximum advantage of the reservation policy to create a class of their own, thus snatching away benefits from the extremely backward sections who are more deserving of the same opportunities.

The issues arising out of this inept implementation of equitable justice are manifold. The first and foremost problem is the never-ending distribution of perks, with castes having received more than their fair share of benefits vehemently opposing letting go of their existing privileges and going the extra mile to dishonestly portray themselves as backward. The growing irritation towards the creamy layer candidates within the OBC sections still claiming continued advantage at the highest levels of governance and administration such as the civil services, etc. as well as the debate centered around the subcategorization of creamy layer castes within the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are most fitting examples of the above-stated problem. The makers of the Constitution had envisioned political and social reservations as temporary and transient features for the introduction of welfare ladders which would eventually reform the backward communities of India. The major catch here is that the terms ‘temporary’ and ‘transient’ have nowhere been explicitly mentioned in the Constitution which allowed governments to keep the system running in place to exploit political benefits. Reservations conversely have become a larger-than-life giant in the present scenario, if you seek to as much as go near it you might well be on a political suicide mission. Reservation not only becoming extraneous but even dangerous is not an extraordinary extrapolation. The latest extension of these supposedly short-term provisions took place in 2019 when the SC/ST quota was extended by another 10 years. With reservation failing to deliver the promise of a just and inequitable society there is a need for momentous introspection on whether it is the way to go forward or if might we look elsewhere.

The second problem is that of a discernible gap between reservation quotas and community employment numbers mostly because of the employment of the backward classes in jobs of a menial nature (e.g., cleaners, sweepers) at government positions and their representation growing abysmal in the ascending order of hierarchy of positions. As per data submitted by the government to the Supreme Court in 2021, the SCs comprised 15.34%, the STs 6.18%, and the OBCs 17.5% of a workforce of 1,23,155 with minority representation adequate in Class 3 & 4 but low in Class 1 jobs. As per the Union Social Justice and Empowerment Ministry in 2021, at least 73.31% of the total people involved in manual scavenging who were surveyed belonged to Scheduled Castes (among those for whom caste-related data was available, 97.25% were SCs). As per the sixth edition of the India Exclusion Report anchored by the Centre of Equity Studies, a study conducted in 2019-20 during the COVID restrictions revealed that among an estimated 1.2 million sanitation workers in India, most were Dalits or from de-notified tribes. Reservations have not helped the municipal authorities to look away from the migrant backward classes from rural denominations when faced with the shortage of cleaning and scavenging jobs. According to the 2011-12 NSSO statistics, the share of wage laborers among SCs was 63% which was significantly higher than the values for other social groups. With the population-to-representation ratio remaining appallingly low and most seats remaining empty even after appointments, a question worth asking here is whether the way reservations are being dispensed needs reconsideration.

The cultural ties of Hinduism cannot be isolated from the fabric of Indian society since even with other religions being in the picture and their minority status recognized and protected, most of their adherents had converted, mostly to welcome dignity in their lives without the prejudices of the caste system. Ironically, they were unable to shed the burden of caste even in their new lives and carried and inculcated caste aspects in their new religious factions of Islam and Christianity. These people were faced with a peculiar problem upon the introduction of reservation, either they could acknowledge casteism within their communities which would go against the basic tenets of their religious beliefs but allow them to avail the benefits associated with reservations, or they could keep their head high, respect their tenets and claim not being discriminated against. Assuming their religious institutions to be reformed, they chose the latter. There is now a growing demand for reservations within non-Hindu communities that they are faced with tough societal realities. Currently, reservation benefits are only available to castes falling under the Hindu sect with the inclusion of the Sikhs and Buddhists. The Dalit converts within Christianity and Islam have filed several petitions before the Supreme Court. How are the voices of these people going to be accommodated in the future and what is the oversaturated system of reservations going to look like then? The union government last year established a commission led by former Chief Justice of India and former NHRC chairperson K G Balakrishnan to investigate granting Scheduled Caste status to individuals who historically belonged to Scheduled Castes but have converted to religions not listed in the Presidential Orders issued under Article 341 of the Constitution.

The reservation policy as it stands now is getting increasingly complicated owing to the constant judicial interpretations and political interventions. After the initial granting of reservation to the SC and ST communities in the original constitution, the V.P. Singh government in 1990 announced another 27 per cent reservation to the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) based on the recommendations of the Mandal Commission Report of 1980. In another such instance of contravention, the government went on to extend the provisions of Article 16 (4) providing reservations of appointment in favour of any backwards classes to further provide promotional benefits to the beneficiary classes which was struck down by the Indra Sawhney v/s UOI judgement of 1992 which stated that reservations in promotion is ultra-vires as there is no such provision specified in the Constitution. However, the government nullified the 1992 judgement bringing forth the 77th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1995 with the object of incorporating Article 16 (4A) to continue with the prior dispensation of promotions. The 93rd Constitutional Amendment Act, of 2005 gave way to the inclusion of Article 15 (5) making special provisions for allowing reservation in admissions for SC, ST and other backward classes to educational institutions. The Constitutional validity of this was challenged in the case of Ashok Kumar Thakur v/s UOI, 2008 where the Supreme Court upheld the amendment but directed the “creamy layer” within the OBC community to be excluded from the reservation.

There seems no end to this back-and-forth game of activism with the 50 per cent reservation cap established by the Indra Sawhney Judgement now deemed flexible after the further 10 per cent reservation for the inclusion of the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) category facilitated by the 103rd Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2019 and the Supreme Court upholding this breach in reservation capping in the Janhit Abhiyan v/s UOI, 2022.

Lastly, how and when is this incommensurate sense of entitlement finally going to end? The earlier trend of dominant communities rejecting quotas is now reversing, and the already contentious issue of reservations has led to new claims of reverse discrimination. We have several examples in the present scenario with the Marathas in Maharashtra, Jats in Haryana and Patels in Gujarat demanding reservation even after enjoying majority community benefits. The Congress Party’s fierce vocal support to the caste census issue is amusing as it refrained from publishing caste data after conducting the 2011 Census even though it readily released data related to the socio-economic conditions of Indian households, fearing the same demands on which it is jumping on the bandwagon now.

Ending Reservations or Positively Implementing Them?

The most prominent argument offered by backers of caste-based reservations is economic progress not being an indicator of actual social recognition with social boycotts against the backward communities existing till the present date. This advocacy falls flat when viewed from an interestingly atypical lens. The only common facilitator between economic progress and social progress is education and it would be high-minded to assume that mindsets change overnight. Analyzing this, the obvious conclusion is that reservation does not improve the social acceptance rate of the marginalized while wealth concentration and educational penetration grow within their community, not reaching other more deserving candidates. If the reservation is not the answer to this glaring problem of manifest inequality, should our policymakers extend it instead of re-evaluating it?  And if these inequalities are not flattening as smoothly as they should be, why do we keep giving away irrelevant and undue benefits for some unattainable absolution for past mistakes? Termed ‘positive discrimination’, reservations have metamorphosed into a thinly veiled form of segregation causing further friction and heightened animosity between the upper and lower castes of India. Hence, differential treatment either in the form of meting out injustice or rewarding reservation is discriminatory itself, since the bias has no set parameters.

Pivoting to re-evaluation of the existing reservation system to ensure the benefits reach the most undermined sections of the social strata is one example of positive implementation instead of blindly justifying its sloppy provisions. There is a need for conducting more studies to facilitate the formalization of the caste system at least from an academic perspective to improve on the vague definitions and better understand the incoherent social constructs. The caste survey is an indispensable tool to achieve this goal but it is crucial to establish a timeline for ending reservations for good once they have adequately succeeded. Fundamental changes have to be inserted in the present implementation system to gauge the horizon and reach there once and for all.

The debate on ending caste-based reservations in India has gained momentum, particularly with the increasing emphasis on economic criteria over caste. The 103rd Constitutional Amendment, which introduced reservations for economically weaker sections (EWS), reflects a significant shift towards addressing economic disparities. However, it also highlights the complexities involved, as it retains a caste dimension by limiting these reservations to the upper castes and excluding lower castes and Scheduled Tribes (ST). This selective approach has sparked discussions on whether economic criteria should completely replace caste-based reservations to ensure that benefits reach the truly needy, regardless of caste.

To positively implement reservations in India, a more inclusive and dynamic framework is essential consisting of policies addressing the gaps between theory and practice. This involves not only revising the policies themselves but also improving the mechanisms for enforcing and monitoring them. Engaging with community leaders and stakeholders in this process can provide insights into the practical challenges and ensure that reforms are grounded in the lived realities of marginalized groups. First, conducting a thorough and periodic nationwide caste survey is essential. This survey should be designed to accurately capture demographic changes and socio-economic conditions, providing a reliable basis for policy adjustments. The survey process should involve clear methodologies to ensure accuracy and transparency, and its findings should be publicly accessible to foster accountability.

Second, a phased transition from caste-based to economic-based reservations should be considered. Integrating economic criteria within the existing caste-based reservation system can ensure that the most disadvantaged individuals, irrespective of caste, receive the necessary support. This would address the economic disparities that persist within and across caste groups. This shift would focus on identifying and supporting economically disadvantaged individuals, thereby addressing the core issue of poverty and inequality more directly. The transition must be gradual to allow affected communities and institutions time to adapt, with clear guidelines and monitoring mechanisms to ensure that the process does not exacerbate existing inequalities.

Third, periodic reviews of reservation policies are crucial. Establishing an independent body to evaluate the effectiveness of reservations and make recommendations based on current socio-economic data will help in continuously refining the system. This body should include experts from diverse fields, including social sciences, economics, and law, to provide a balanced perspective. These reviews should consider socio-economic progress and aim to phase out reservations for communities that have achieved significant advancement. By focusing on education and employment opportunities and implementing awareness programs to reduce caste-based prejudices, India can foster a more equitable and inclusive society. Ultimately, the goal should be to create a reservation system that promotes social justice without perpetuating caste sensitivities.

Addressing the policy framework for caste-based reservations in India necessitates a critical examination of both its implementation and the historical context of subjugated classes. Historically, the experiences and struggles of these communities have either been overlooked or framed through a privileged perspective. However, the growing emphasis on historical consciousness and representation has begun to reshape this narrative, highlighting the need for a more nuanced understanding of social justice. Scholars like Michel Foucault suggest a shift from retributive and procedural justice to distributive and restorative justice, reflecting evolving concepts of fairness and equity. In India, this shift requires a thorough realignment of legal frameworks with social realities, ensuring that justice provisions are effectively applied and socially accepted.

The time must end when the reservation was viewed as a means of atonement for the injustices faced by backward communities. This state of perpetual guilt can only last for so long as the applicability of this form of reflective welfarism has largely changed in the modern context. Viewing caste reservations as rational tools of socioeconomic reforms is the only logical present disposition if we seek to bring about real change and that is precisely what we should be attempting.