<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16414" name=GENERATOR>
<DEFANGED_style_0 </STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DEFANGED_DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>here is a posting from another list about the
complex situation over the reservation policy of our government.</FONT></DEFANGED_DIV>
<DEFANGED_DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DEFANGED_DIV>
<DEFANGED_DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Stoking the reservation
fires </FONT></DEFANGED_DIV>
<DEFANGED_DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DEFANGED_DIV>
<DEFANGED_DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>There would seem to be no end to the reservations
debate, with the Supreme Court's halting in its tracks what all the political
parties together had crafted<BR>as a major social justice measure that struck a
fair balance between the interests of different sections. What is surprising is
that the court should have<BR>stayed the operation of the law so close to
admission time, and that when the institutions were preparing to increase the
number of seats over three years<BR>to provide for reservations. Over the years,
a great deal of uncertainty has been introduced into the constitutional law on
reservations by differing opinions<BR>handed down by different benches and a
plethora of year to year stay orders. The strategies of various governments in
resorting to constitutionally impermissible<BR>quotas and procedures and trying
to sneak under the radars of the courts have only worsened the situation. In
essence, under the new law, both the identification<BR>of the Other Backward
Classes and the 27 per cent figure for reservations followed the earlier
government order that reserved posts in government services<BR>on the basis of
the Mandal Commission recommendations. A nine-member bench of the Supreme Court
upheld that order. Yet this time round the court chose<BR>to question the
validity of the use of the 1931 census as the basis and point to the absence of
any new survey of backwardness as a major infirmity in<BR>the reservations
system. It needs to be noted that in the census operations subsequent to 1931
caste-wise data were not gathered. </FONT></DEFANGED_DIV>
<DEFANGED_DIV> </DEFANGED_DIV>
<DEFANGED_DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The bench was on stronger ground, however, on the
issue of the creamy layer that has not been excluded from the purview of
reservations. This non-exclusion<BR>goes to the basic question of identification
of a class as backward. For unless those who occupy constitutional positions
such as Governors or are members<BR>of the all-India services or are
professionals such as doctors, lawyers, and chartered accountants or are
affluent and do not suffer social or educational<BR>disadvantages are excluded,
a caste cannot be categorised as a backward class. It is also obvious that in a
competitive environment if such advanced categories<BR>are provided
reservations, they will crowd out the really backward among the OBCs. Indeed, no
argument based on equity or fairness has been advanced in<BR>support of the
reluctance of the State governments — and now the Centre — to exclude the creamy
layer from reservations. Equally relevant is the issue<BR>of keeping out certain
areas such as airline pilots, higher specialities in medicine or engineering or
research, and the armed forces outside the scheme<BR>of reservations. The
overall national interest would also require preserving certain institutions
such as the Indian Institutes of Technology and the Indian<BR>Institutes of
Management as islands of excellence uncompromised by any other
consideration. </FONT></DEFANGED_DIV>
<DEFANGED_DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DEFANGED_DIV>
<DEFANGED_DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>******<BR></FONT></DEFANGED_DIV>
<DEFANGED_DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Vedprakash Sharma<BR>Ph 011-32440078, M
09350158273<BR>skype Id: ved1234</FONT></DEFANGED_DIV></BODY></HTML>