The Supreme Court said on Thursday, 13 April, the Karnataka government’s decision raising quotas in government jobs and educational institutions for Vokkaligas and Lingayats by two percent each while scrapping the four percent reservation for OBC Muslims prima facie appeared to be on “highly shaky ground” and “flawed”.
A bench of Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna said from the records tabled before the court, it appeared that the Karnataka government’s decision is based on an “absolutely fallacious assumption”.
‘No study conducted’
Senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Dushyant Dave and Gopal Sankarnarayanan, appearing for members of the Muslim community from Karnataka, said no study was conducted and there was no empirical data available with the government to scrap the quota for Muslims.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for Karnataka, sought some time to file replies to the petitions and assured the bench that no appointments and admissions will be made in the meantime based on the 24 March government order which has been challenged by the petitioners.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for members of the Vokkaliga and Lingayat communities, said no interim order should be passed without allowing them to place their response to the petitions.
The bench posted the matter for further hearing on 18 April and asked Mehta and Rohatgi to file their responses.
Related: Karnataka decides to do away with 4% reservation for Muslims
Background: ‘Legally untenable’
Constitutional experts opine that the decision is legally untenable, and hence cannot be implemented.
After making Category 2B redundant, the four percent reservation exclusively for Muslims would now be divided into two equal parts and added to the existing quotas for the electorally significant Vokkaliga and the Lingayat communities.
Two new reservation categories — 2C and 2D — were created for them during the Belagavi Assembly session in December.
The Congress and the JD(S) have protested against the move, with the former even announcing a rollback on the decision if it came to power in the state. The Karnataka Assembly election will be held on 10 May.
Experts punch holes in BJP claims
During his recent visit to Karnataka, Union Home Minister Amit Shah defended the BJP state government’s decision, insisting that the Constitution doesn’t allow for reservation on the basis of religion.
Experts have pointed to how the statement is misleading.
“Does the Union home minister not know that there are no reservations at all based on religious minority status?” asked Dr CS Dwarakanath, former chairman of the Karnataka Backward Class Commission.
“From the Nagana Gowda Commission report, Havannur Commission report, Justice Chinnappa Reddy Commission report to the Venkataswamy report, all of them categorise Muslims under backward classes. There is no religion or caste, but they used the word ‘class’,” he pointed out.
Dwarakanath added that the community was deemed “backward” because of its social and educational backwardness, not just economic backwardness.
“Articles 15 (4) and 16 (4) of the Constitution point to the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth; and equality of opportunity in matters of public employment,” he told South First.
South First pre-poll survey Karnataka 2023: Who is voting for which party and why
Procedure, process replaced by ‘political compulsions’
The Havanur Commission report — a thoroughly scientific report that even became the prelude to the Mandal commission — identified the Muslim community as a socio-economically backward class and recommended up to six percent reservation.
The community’s religious minority status was not the grounds on which these recommendations were made.
The Justice Chinnappa Reddy Commission deemed the Muslim community “More Backward” and included it in its Category II of OBCs along with 114 groups, including Buddhists and SC converts to Christianity, with a recommended reservation of 28 percent for the category.
The yardstick, once again, was social and educational backwardness.
Even within the existing categories for reservation, several “Most Backward” sub-sects and sub-groups among Muslims such as Nadaf and Pinjara fall under Category I in Karnataka. This is example enough to say that all Muslims don’t get a blanket reservation under 2B of OBC; there are specific sects and sub-groups divided under different categories based on their backwardness.
Even the central OBC list that features “Muslims” as a group explicitly excludes at least nine sub-sects and sub-castes of Muslims such as Bohra, Navayat, Sheik, Mughal, and Pathan.
This means that even within the Muslim community, specific sub-sects and sub-castes are recognised as backward and only those are given reservation — much like is the case with Vokkaligas, Lingayats, Kurubas, and other Hindu community groups.
Moreover, Christians, Jains and Buddhists continue to be part of the OBC category for reservation, further raising questions over the government’s justification of “religion” to scrap the Muslim quota.
(With PTI inputs)
