OBC Quota: How OBC quota demand in med seats put Centre in a spot

The Union government’s understanding, interpretation and implementation of other backward communities (OBC) reservation in All India Quota (AIQ) medical seats are full of self-contradictions and somersaults. On July 27, the Madras high court delivered a far-from-conclusive ruling on the issue asking the Centre to bring in a mechanism to enforce OBC quota in AIQ seats. But this judicial nudge is neither necessary nor consequential as the Centre is not unaware of its constitutional obligations. Yet, for more than three decades it has been ducking it and denying OBCs their due.In existence since 1984 (Pradeep Kumar Jain case), the AIQ medical seats are accrued from the surrender of 15% of medical seats by states available in their government medical colleges. Yet, till the Supreme Court decided the Abhay Nath case in 2009, the Centre did not spare a single seat for any reserved category candidate. Since then it has been providing reservation only for SC (15%) and ST (7.5%) candidates, as per the central scheme. But, there was no mention of OBCs (27%) till the present round of litigation. medium77221398Now that the question has been raised and a political storm kicked up, what has been the Centre’s response? First, in mid-June, the Supreme Court said political parties, led by the DMK, should not have rushed to the apex court bypassing legal remedy available in the high court since reservation is not a fundamental right. When the parties moved the Madras high court, the Centre sought to drive them back to the apex court saying a similar case (Saloni Kumari case, 2015) was pending before the Supreme Court, and the parties need to get themselves impleaded in that batch of cases. It was, however, overruled and the first bench of the high court heard it.Untitled Carousel 76479791Second, it told the court that OBC reservation in AIQ category is applicable only in central institutions. For more than three decades, when the petitioner-political parties were part of the successive Union governments, no OBC reservation was given, it said. However, what it left unsaid was when OBC quota is okay in AIQ seats in central institutions — which are very few in number — what stops the Centre from extending it to state government medical colleges? Third, during arguments, the DMK’s senior counsel, Rajya Sabha member P Wilson dug out an affidavit filed by the Centre before the Supreme Court in the pending Saloni Kumari case. The Centre had said there that the OBC quota for AIQ seats in non-central institutions is under active consideration. This stand that lacked clarity and commitment was not expanded before Madras high court. The Centre failed to announce that 27% OBC reservation, if not 50% as demanded by Tamil Nadu parties, would be implemented in non-central medical colleges this year onwards. Untitled Carousel 77207651The Centre also tried a hands off approach when it said the matter was subjudice, it was for the Supreme Court to take a call and that the high court should await the apex court ruling. But when a question was raised as to how the quota matrix was tweaked to accommodate 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Section (EWS) among forward communities last year, there was no convincing response. One, EWS was introduced when the reservation matrix under AIQ was still ‘subjudice’; two, it was brought in after the first round of counselling for AIQ medical seats was over. It was introduced midway, that too without ‘permission’ from courts. When this is possible for EWS, why not for OBCs as well?The Centre also desisted from keeping two of its statutory entities — Medical Council of India (MCI) and the Director-General of Health Services (DGHS) — off the controversy, even though reservation is a policy matter between state and Union governments, besides the stakeholders, with or without the intervention of courts. MCI and DGHS, on the other hand, are mere agencies vested with the responsibility of just implementing the policy. The Madras high court order on July 27 was particularly caustic on the role and stand of MCI to oppose the OBC quota under AIQ medical seats in state government medical colleges. medium77221639Post-verdict, there is no legal bar to implement OBC reservation, but the question over the quantum of the quota is still to be answered. Will it be 27% of available seats under AIQ seats for OBCs, as per the central scheme, or 50% for OBCs as per the Tamil Nadu scheme? It was not for nothing that TN political parties rallied against the Centre. If the 50% OBC quota under AIQ category is enforced, more than 250 MBBS seats and about 430 postgraduate medical seats would go to OBC candidates every year.boxcontentTamil Nadu vs. Centre: A 3 decade fight for OBC reservationSEPT 16, 1921 | The Justice Party in government passed the first Communal Government Order, becoming the first elected body in India to legislate reservations 1946 | Quota for SCs increased from 8.33% to 12.33% 1951 | OBC reservation of 25%, along with 16% for SC/ST introduced 1971 | OBC quota increased to 31% and SC/ST quota to 18% 1980 | AIADMK government of M G Ramachandran introduced ‘creamy layer’ and income ceiling for quota benefits. After protests, he withdrew it, and increased OBC quota to 50%, taking reservation percentage to 68% 1989 | Due to Vanniar Sangam protests, M Karunanidhi government split the 50% OBC quota and granted 20% for most backward communities (MBC). An 1% exclusive quota for STs was added, taking total reservation percentage to 69% 1992-1994 | Though SC kept 50% ceiling for reservations in the Mandal judgment in 1992, the Jayalalithaa government insulated it from judicial review. Several rounds of litigations ensued, and batches of cases are still pending before SCUntitled Carousel 67429441