Parliament passes 124th Constitutional Amendment Bill - Quota Bill

The Modi government’s bid to provide 10% quota for the economically weak crossed an important hurdle on Wednesday with the Rajya Sabha approving the bill with a margin of 165-7, a day after the Lok Sabha had cleared the legislation 323-3. With the parliamentary process complete, the law can now be notified by the President.

About 124th Constitutional Amendment Bill :-

• The bill seeks to amend Articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution to give reservation to the economically backward sectionsamong the general/ unreserved category over and above the 49.5% quota in place for SC, ST and OBCs.
• It seeks to insert a separate clause in article 16 after clause (5) which reads as:
  “Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any economically weaker sections of citizens other than the classes mentioned in clause (4), in addition to the existing reservation and subject to a maximum of 10% of the posts in each category”
• It seeks 10% reservation for the economically weaker sections of society in higher educational institutes, private institutions whether aided or unaided by the State other than the minority educational institutions referred to in Article 30.
• It also provides reservation in posts in initial appointment in services under the State.

Qualifying Criteria for the proposed quota : General category individuals

• All members of whose family together earn less than Rs. 8 lakh per annum
• Have less than five acres of agricultural land
• Do not possess a residential flat of area 1,000 sq ft or larger
• Do not possess a residential plot of area 100 yards or more in notified municipalities and 200 yards or more in areas other than notified municipalities

Future Implications: Once the Constitution is amended to add economic backwardness as a ground for reservations, it will most likely have to stand the test of judicial scrutiny, as the Supreme Court had in the Indra Sawhney case capped quotas at 50% of the available seats.

& If the Supreme Court agrees to lift the 50% cap, all States of India can extend the quantum of reservation and “upper castes” will stand to lose in State services.

If the Supreme Court rejects the idea of breaching the 50% cap, Economically Weaker Section (EWS) quotas can be provided only by eating into the SC, ST and OBC quota pie, which will have social and political implications.

The move may have some appeal to upper castes in States.

Government Escape: The 10 per cent reservation will be over and above the 50 per cent reservation stipulated by the Supreme Court. Any reservation above the cap invites judicial scrutiny. But the government has argued that the fresh reservation depends on economy, not caste and so, will not fall foul of the top court

Impact of reservation:

• If the EWS is treated as a category just like the SC, ST and OBC, a large chunk of general category candidates will apply for just 10% seats and the cut-offs can rise.
• Candidates who are above the general cut-off may still occupy this 10% quota to get a better service or cadre for example in UPSC.

Challenges before the proposed Quota:

• Criteria:
  Critics argue that the 8lakh income threshold is too high and will practically cover nearly the entire population not already covered by reservations. Data from the I-T department as well as reports from the NSSO show that at least 95% of Indian families will fall within this limit. Other qualifying criteria have also been argued to be flawed.
• Sole economic criterion:
  The SC in Indira Sawhney case has upheld that a backward class cannot be determined only and exclusively with reference to economic criterion. Thus introducing a quota based on only economic dimensions will face judicial scrutiny.
• 50% cap:The Supreme Court has laid the bar for reservations at 50% — the current proposal will exceed the limit and thus could be legally challenged.
• Determining economic backwardness:
  Even if the bill is passed, a formidable challenge would be determining economic backwardness. There are concerns over inclusion and exclusion of persons under the criteria.
• Implementation:
  Critics argue that even if the proposal is legislated, the implementation would be a great challenge as the states do not have the finances to implement even the existing and constitutionally-mandated reservations.
• Shrinking jobs:When government in itself is trying to limit its public services along with advancement of technology in government system. Therefore providing quota in jobs in such a scenario will be a futile exercise.
• Encouraging reservations:The intent of constitutional makers as originally manifested through Article 15 and 16 was to be reviewed after 10 yrs. But it is an irony that instead of restricting the policy of positive discrimination government is pushing it in some or other forms.
• Populist measure:When elections are near, several populists’ initiatives are advanced by political parties like loan waiver, reservations etc. and given the low levels of political literacy and awareness among masses often parties take leverage of the same thereby affecting the socio-economic and political structure at large .
• Lacks of Evidences to support outcomes:
  Even after years of reservation policy, there are no substantial evidences to support the achievements of the original intent of affirmative action. For Example, only about 4% each of rural Scheduled Tribe and Scheduled Caste households have a member in a government job.
• Absence of Level Playing Field:
  It has been observed that few forward among the reserved category could only reap the benefit of reservation policy. Such fear can spilled over reservation based on economic criteria as well. Upper ladder in the reserved category are primarily benefitted from the policy while the benefits do not reach the marginalized.