People's Democracy(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) |
Vol.
XXX
No. 18 April 30, 2006 |
Reservations
Are Not Against Merit
R
Arun Kumar
THE
announcement of the Human Resources Development Minister regarding the
government’s intention to reserve 27 per cent of the seats for the Other
Backward Castes in central educational institutes started an intense debate.
Unfortunately vested sections in the media are trying to arouse passions among
the students against this supposed move terming it as anti-merit and against
national interests. They have also termed it as Mandal II and ‘mandalisation
of education’. We are not against the move to allocate reservations for the
backward sections of the society, and indeed support it.
The
provision of reservations to OBCs is prevalent in many states, while the Union
government is trying to introduce reservations now. In a class society education
is always considered as a tool to maintain the status quo of the society and
ensure the protection of the interests of the ruling classes. They want
institutes like IITs and IIMs-the centres of excellence-to remain as their
exclusive preserve. Thus the entire capitalist class and their voices in the
media are trying hard to bar the entry of common people into the institutes of
excellence though they are not bothered about this in admissions to state
institutions that are sub-standard. They are not concerned about merit when
seats are reserved under NRI quota, but are agitated when they are reserved for
OBCs. The real reason for the opposition to reservations is this elitist
approach and to further this they are spreading canards and playing with the
lives and futures of innocent students by trying to rouse their passions and
consciously hiding reality from them. Though the government too is their
representative it is forced to concede this right to the backward sections of
the society because of the popular struggles from below and the increased
influence of the Left, the protector of the interests of the toiling sections.
The
central government is trying to implement reservations in the central institutes
using the power it has accrued from amending the Constitution (104 Amendment,
now known as 93rd Amendment) providing for special provisions for educationally,
socially marginalised and other backward sections of the society along with the
SCs and STs. The government was forced to amend the Constitution to provide for
reservations in self-financing institutions by the militant struggles of the
students across the country. The amendment was made after the Supreme Court had
ruled that the government does not have any control over the private unaided
institutes in a series of its judgements starting from the TMA Pai case in 2002
to the more recent P A Inamdar case. It is the duty of the Union government and
all the state governments to enact an enabling legislation to this affect. The
purpose of the Constitutional amendment would be defeated if this provision of
reservations is not extended to all the self-financing institutions. Pressure
has to be mounted on the government for this.
The
general argument that is put forward against reservations is that it is against
merit and enables all sub-standard students to enter the prestigious and reputed
institutes. It is ironical that those people who are crying hoarse over the loss
of merit have never bothered to raise their voice when the government was
commercialising education and allowing all sub-standard institutes to be set-up
across the country. The only criterion for admission in these institutes is
money and never merit. There are instances galore across the country where
meritorious students are denied admission in many private institutes because of
their financial backwardness. In spite of several directions from the Supreme
Court that admissions to all the professional institutes should be provided only
after getting through a merit-based entrance examination, they are openly
violated. Neither the government bothered to rein them, nor the newly
self-proclaimed protectors of merit and national interests ever raised their
voice.
Merit
is a very relative concept. In our country there are entrance examinations for
admission to many or almost all the institutes of higher learning. All the
students who appear in these entrance examinations are supposed to get through
the qualifying examinations too i.e. a student appearing for admission in a IIT
should clear his +2 board examinations also. There are many instances where the
top ranker of the qualifying examination (+2 here) failed to attain a rank good
enough in the entrance examination. Now, can this student be regarded as a
meritorious student or not?
It
is a known fact that coaching institutes play a big role in preparing students
for the entrance examinations. Access to quality education (this does not mean
just the institute but also includes the availability of books, academic
atmosphere etc) is not available to majority of students staying in rural areas
and slums in the urban regions as it comes at a cost. This too plays a big role
in the marks that a student secures. Both these conditions are available to a
privileged few in our society. Is it right to deny access to higher education
just because a child is born in a poor and unprivileged family that does not
have the means to provide him the best of education? Is it not the duty of the
government to initiate special provisions like reservations for them? After all,
it takes lots of polishing even to make a diamond shine from its crude state and
the absence of this makes it just as worthy as an ordinary carbon stone. We
should not forget that merit is directly linked with the policies of the
government and the availability of quality education to all students
irrespective of their economic and social conditions. It is to be noted here
that the Director of IIT, Kharagpur has said that their institute derives its
name from the output and not the input and that reservation does not in any way
effect the quality of education imparted in these reputed institutes.
The
opponents of reservations are arguing that the government should improve the
conditions of the government schools first and then think about reservations.
Interestingly when V P Singh decided for providing job reservations, these
people have argued that reservations have to be first provided in education. Now
when the government is thinking of providing reservations in education they are
opposing it and suggesting the improvement of school education first. All this
shows that basically these people are against the welfare of the unprivileged
sections of our country. It is true that the government has to put its lot in
improving the quality of school education. To argue against reservations till
this is done is erroneous. Both these things have to be done simultaneously and
not like the philosophical question of which is first-egg or hen. For this the
government has to increase its budgetary allocations on education and reach the
promised level of at least 6 per cent of the GDP.
Quality
of education took a dive to abyss once the government started abdicating its
social responsibility and started starving education and social sectors of
resources. This has adversely affected the quality right from the primary to the
university level. Most of the private institutes that have entered into the
space vacated by the government have failed to ensure quality in education as
their prime motive is earning ‘returns’ for their ‘investment’. It is no
wonder that many of the private institutions do not adhere to the prescribed
norms of the certifying agencies like AICTE, UGC, MCI, NCTE, etc. The state of
various private universities and deemed universities is a worthy example (Tamilnadu
a recent addition to the list) to be remembered here. Thousands of students are
graduating from these institutes with poor quality and none of today’s
messiahs of merit and quality bothered to voice concern. Hiding all these facts
and just stating that reservations will lead to graduation of sub-standard
engineers and doctors, adversely affecting the national interest is dubious.
This shows their casteist bias and denigration of the efforts put up by the OBCs,
SCs and STs. An important fact is that there are many brilliant professionals
from dalit, tribal and other backward caste communities who have graduated after
availing the reservations and are contributing to the national development. Outlook,
the weekly news magazine has carried out interviews of few of these people and
it can be confidently stated that there are many of their ilk.
Thus the argument that providing for reservations in the central
institutes would compromise quality is faulty and does not have any credence.
Moreover
all the central institutes have prescribed minimum qualifications required for
gaining eligibility for admission. Students are given admission under
reservation only after they prove themselves to be over and above the prescribed
eligibility criteria. It is the duty of the society and the institute to prepare
the students to face the rigorous course work both before and after they enter
the institute. Remedial classes should be organised. Special attention has to be
given to them. Scholarships have to be provided to all the needy students so
that they can concentrate on their studies rather than be burdened about the
means to raise resources for the continuation of their study. A recent survey
carried out by the Jawaharlal Nehru University Students Union (JNUSU) brought to
light the various hardships faced by the students studying in the university
because of their financial status and how this is affecting their study.
The
periodic increase in the fee collected from the students is also one of the
impediments for the students desiring to pursue higher education. Recent studies
suggest that India is one of the few countries where higher education is
available at a premium. The student fee accounts for more than 20 per cent of
the costs incurred and this is more than the average in most of the developed
countries, not to speak about the developing countries. Looking at the fees that
is charged in the IIMs, irrespective of what the student might earn after
getting employment- is enough to discourage students from the lower middle class
and poor families from opting for them. This is all the more true for the
students coming from SC, ST, OBC and rural backgrounds. It is the duty of the
government to ensure that along with reservations, scholarships too are provided
and the fee is brought to a level that does not deny access to education.
People
who are against reservations are spreading panic among the students that they
will lose seats in the education institutes. It is sad that these people instead
of demanding the government to increase the number of seats available in the
reputed institutes and establish many such reputed institutes are silent on the
issue or are against these moves. These are the very people who want the
government to move away from its social responsibility of imparting higher
education.
There
is a big demand for higher education in our country and this is going to
increase in the coming days, as there is a demographic shift towards youth in
our country. More than half of our population is under-20 years of age. Only 7-9
per cent of the students are in higher education in the relevant age group. The
Central Advisory Board on Education (CABE) report on the financing of higher
education states that many of the developed countries have more than 20 per cent
of the youth in the relevant age group in higher education. Though this is not
the reason for their present developed state, nobody can deny the fact that for
a country to become a super power it needs many qualified personnel. Only
widening the net of our higher education system can achieve this and this can be
done only by the government and not by private players. This has been the
experience worldwide. Government has to come forward in a big way and start many
new institutes, improve the conditions of the institutes run by it and ensure
access to quality education for all. Instead of this, the government is keeping
silent on the demands for increasing the number of IITs and IIMs. The IIM
managements too are not thinking of starting a new centre in India but are more
interested in starting their centres in Singapore, Dubai and other foreign
lands. These moves give rise to a question regarding their interests. Is it not
profit that is driving their decisions than national interests and social
responsibility?
Indian
industrial houses that have immensely benefited from the reservations provided
to them in the name of protection by the government are arguing against
reservations now. They do not think twice when demanding incentives and tax
holidays in their competition with foreign players in the ‘market’ even in
this era of ‘globalisation’. For them this is the level playing field, but
the same is not true for the unprivileged sections in our society who genuinely
need reservations and government support. Irony can never get better.
In
the appeal issued to the students during the anti and pro reservation stir
earlier, SFI has stated: “we all know that the real solution to the burning
problems of the people, including SC/STs and OBCs, lies in the reversal of
policies-industrial, economic and educational-which led to the overwhelming
destitution of the people, as well as in radical land and other reforms. Unless
these are achieved reservation has a definite but limited role to play”. Till
such a socio-economic change is ushered in, reservations should continue as a
minimum support to the scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and other backward
castes.
Reservations
for the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes must continue without any
qualification as they form the bulk of the rural poor and have been suffering
for centuries not only from economic exploitation but also from social
oppression at the hands of the landlords and other rural exploiters who mainly
belong to the upper castes. This is absolutely necessary to give them a minimum
level of protection without which they cannot hope to compete with others.
Some
sections of the OBCs like the barbers, washer men etc too are discriminated
socially though of varying degree. This is a practice that is continuing from
ages (a fact hidden from the innocent city-bred students unaware of the Indian
realities) followed by the very people who are vociferous against reservations.
There should be reservations for the OBCs on the basis of an agreed upon
economic criterion as in certain areas they belong to the land owning classes,
even though they may remain educationally and culturally backward. The use of
economic criterion is a must to judiciously administer a policy of reservations
and to periodically review their positions for this purpose. Some reservations
to the economically backward people not covered by any reservations also should
be provided.
Some
people do argue that reservations have benefited only a small section of the
people. At the level of facts, this is true. But instead of pointing to the
futility of reservations it only points to an important fact-that unless
democratic movement becomes strong enough to get the provision of reservations
effectively implemented, unless the old feudal structure in the villages is
dismantled and social oppression done away with, this limitation will continue
and cannot be avoided.
It
is natural that these questions are raised when educational opportunities and
employment avenues are dwindling. The opposition to reservation also arises from
those sections that include a large number of the economically deprived.
Actually, both the votaries and opponents of reservations seem to consider
admission into the limited number of seats and recruitment to the limited number
of jobs available as the crucial question for their economic progress.
Reservations are one of the important issues raised by the national
movement to uplift the socially oppressed sections of our society. Though they
were intended as a temporary measure, the failure of the successive governments
in ensuring equitable and speedy economic development led to their continuation
and made them a contentious issue.
We
must understand that it is not the policy of reservation that lies at the root
of the problem but it is the limited number of employment and educational
opportunities that is the root cause. In today’s world where the public sector
is being systematically dismantled, government is going back from its social
responsibilities this is even more important. Living in the times where the
private sector is accorded a key role in the economy, we have to demand for
reservations even in private sector. United, we should all fight for education
for all and jobs for all and not against reservations. We must also remember the
fact that the solution to the problems of access to education, unemployment,
social disparities, injustice, requires the united endeavour of all sections and
communities for a basic change in the socio-economic structure of our society.