Today's Editorial

Disparity among Dalits needs to be acknowledged

Relevance: GS Paper II

Why in News?

A seven-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court allowed states to create sub-classifications within SC and ST reserved categories. This decision has sparked discussions in elite universities, public institutions, and among political parties and the general public.

Two Main Views on Sub-Classification of Quota in SC/ST communities:

1. In favor of sub-classification.
2. Opposed to sub-classification.

Creamy Layer and SC/ST Reservation:

• Both proponents and critics of sub-classification agree on the exclusion of the creamy layer clause in SC and ST reservations. 
• The Cabinet has also clarified that there are no plans to implement the creamy layer exclusion in these quotas. 
• This consensus is rooted in the understanding that SCs and STs have historically faced social humiliation and that reservation is a means to address generational social exclusion. 
• Excluding economically secure members of these communities through a creamy layer sub-categorization is seen as counterproductive, as it could perpetuate discrimination.

Debate on Sub-Classification:

• While there is broad agreement on the creamy layer issue, sub-classification based on caste within SC/ST reservations has received mixed responses. 
• Critics argue that sub-classification could fragment the pan-Dalit identity, which has been strengthened by the Ambedkarite movement. 
• They also point out that the privileged sections of the SC/ST communities, who have embraced Ambedkarisation, are more assertive and visible due to their middle-class status achieved through reservation in education and employment.

Visibility and the Pan-Dalit Identity:

• The visibility of certain SC communities, such as the neo-Buddhists in Maharashtra, Malas and Adi-Andhras in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, and Jatavs and Chamars in North India, can be attributed to their sizable population and early participation in the Ambedkarite movement. 
• In contrast, other communities like the Mangs (Maharashtra), Madigas (Telangana), and Valmikis (North India) are considered 'late entrants' in the anti-caste movement, which has affected their visibility and access to resources.

Historical Context of Sub-Classification:

• The idea of sub-classification within SC reservations dates back to the B N Lokur Committee of 1965, which observed that welfare benefits were concentrated in numerically large and politically well-organized communities. 
• This led to various state-level initiatives, such as Punjab's 1975 notification giving preference to Valmiki and Mazhabi Sikh castes, identified as the most backward within the SC category. 
• The demand for sub-classification gained momentum in the 1990s with the Madiga Reservation Porata Samithi in Andhra Pradesh, leading to the formation of the R Raju Committee. 
• Based on R Raju Committee recommendation, AP created sub-classification within SC reservation that was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2004.

Commissions on Sub-Classification:

• The demand for sub-classification has not been isolated, with several commissions across India recommending categorization and sub-classification of SC reservations based on their findings. 
• These include:

• • Hukum Singh Commission (Uttar Pradesh, 2001),

• • Lahuji Salve Commission (Maharashtra, 2003), 

• • Sadashiva Commission (Karnataka, 2005), 

• • Usha Mehra Commission (Centre, 2007),

• • Janarthanam Commission (Tamil Nadu, 2008).

Extending Social Justice:

• The principle of social justice underlying SC/ST reservation should be extended to castes that have not been able to access welfare resources. 
• If reservation was introduced to address socio-economic inequality among historically disadvantaged castes through proportional representation, then the same principle should be applied to backward castes within the SC category. 
• The Supreme Court's 2024 verdict recognizes the necessity of sub-classification for the most disadvantaged and marginalized groups that have failed to benefit from reservation.

Conclusion:

Rather than ignoring or penalizing the internal disparities within the Dalit community, it is essential to acknowledge the vast differences in socio-economic status, education, and employment within the community. Recognizing these disparities offers an opportunity to foster solidarity among Dalit castes and to actualize a genuinely unified Dalit category and politics.

Beyond Editorial: