advertisement
Video Editor: Ashutosh Bhardwaj
Video Producer: Anubhav Mishra
Camera: Shiv Kumar Maurya
On 14 January, Gujarat became the first state to implement the 10 percent quota for economically weaker sections in the general category. Ever since the Bill was passed in the Parliament, it has sparked a major debate.
While some say the move will genuinely benefit economically weaker sections in the general category, others say it is a political ploy by the BJP to revive its fortunes after losing Assembly elections in Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan. People also point that giving quotas based on income, not caste, violates the purpose of reservation.
The Quint spoke to a number of UPSC aspirants in Delhi and asked them about their views on the government’s decision.
Hemant Verma, a UPSC aspirant, told The Quint that reservation in our Constitution, has been cited as a social issue., and hence, should only be provided on social grounds. He further argued that by making reservation an economic issues, the government is treating ‘savarnas’ like a vote bank.
Another UPSC aspirant told The Quint that those who framed our Constitution saw reservation as a tool to uplift those who are socially and educationally backward.
Who are the people from upper caste that will be considered a part of economically weaker sections? According to the criteria mentioned in the Bill, people who will be considered a part of economically weaker section are:
But many UPSC aspirants pointed that most of the citizens fall under this criteria.
Another UPSC aspirant argued that when the government deems anyone earning over Rs 2.5 lakh per annum rich enough to pay taxes, how can the one earning up to Rs 8 lakh be economically weak?
Another UPSC aspirant said that if the government keeps increasing the quotas for reservation, the Bharatiya loktantra (Indian democracy) may soon become arakshantantra (system based on reservation).
Some UPSC aspirants were of the view that if the Bill is challenged in the court, it may be struck down as under the Indira Sawhney vs Union of India case, the Supreme Court had ruled that reservation on economic grounds isn’t constitutional.
However, others were of the view that since the government has passed a constitutional amendment in the Parliament, there is little to nothing that the courts can do about this Bill.
However, a few of the UPSC aspirants argued that even the benefits of caste-based reservations are yet to reach the weaker sections among Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST).
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)