While submitting his report to the President of India on December 31, 1980, BP Mandal had stated, “Our report, however, does not stand in the way of the states, if they want to take in any measure for the upliftment of the weaker sections of people like the women and the poorer and others who are not covered by our terms of reference, it may be noted that there is no bar to make further reservations for them.” The report’s loophole has resulted in the unconstitutional allocation of reservations for undeserving citizens by specific state governments like West Bengal and Karnataka.
In West Bengal, of the 42 Lok Sabha constituencies, the Muslim community plays a key role in 22 constituencies and has the capacity to influence the electoral outcome. This includes Raiganj, Maldaha Uttar and Dakshin, Cooch Behar, Birbhum, Balurghat, Bolpur, Jangipur, Murshidabad, Baharampur, Krishnanagar, Bardhaman Purba, Barasat, Bashirhat, Jadavpur, Joynagar, Mathurapur, Diamond Harbour, Kolkata Dakshin, Uluberia, Howrah and Kolkata Uttar.
West Bengal today not only grapples with issues of illegal immigration from neighbouring Bangladesh but also faces challenges related to the distribution of reservations to ineligible individuals. Regrettably, backward classes within the Hindu community are now being excluded from the constitutional protections they are entitled to, while representations of the Muslim community under reservation quota are on the rise in the state.
After Indra Sawhney and Ors Vs Union of India, every state government and the Union was directed to establish commissions for identifying OBCs. In 1993, the West Bengal government established the West Bengal Commission for Backward Classes. To cater to the Muslim community, which makes up around 28 per cent of the state’s population and is the largest vote bank of the Trinamool Congress (TMC), Mamata Banerjee’s government made certain modifications. Between March 5, 2010, and May 11, 2012, the West Bengal government declared 77 classes as OBC through seven executive orders/memoranda issued by the State. This decision was later contested, leading to the current ruling by the Hon’ble High Court.
The West Bengal government not only wrongly included 77 classes in the State list of OBCs, but also recommended their inclusion in the Central list. This irregularity was brought to the attention of the National Commission for Backward Classes. Out of the 87 communities proposed for inclusion, the state recommended 78 Muslim and 8 Hindu communities. Furthermore, an investigation conducted by the National Commission revealed that the majority of the recommended individuals were Muslim converts from the Hindu religion, providing solid evidence of state-sponsored proselytisation.
In order to facilitate the inclusion of the Muslim community under the OBC quota, the state government diluted the statutory provisions of the West Bengal Commission for Backward Classes in 2010. Consequently, the Commission’s decisions are no longer binding on the state government. This inclusion, which bypasses the constitutional mechanisms put in place to protect the interests of backward classes regardless of religious affiliation, may eventually lead to a situation where more Hindu backward communities feel compelled to convert to Islam in order to avail themselves of reservation benefits.
Over the years, there has been a state-promoted “Meenakshipuram” event taking place across West Bengal. It is not surprising that, due to these widespread conversions and the extensive support given to a particular community, revered Hindu seers are being targeted and verbally abused by political leaders of the TMC.
The state must maintain a proper distance from the Commission to ensure its independence in identifying and recommending classes without interference. Unfortunately, in this instance, the state not only interfered with the Commission’s operations but also tampered with the constitutional rights of backward classes without evidence-based data. The court has stated that such exclusion of the Commission’s role and the state’s unilateral decision-making on reservation percentages amounts to an abuse of legislative power and a violation of constitutional rights. The court further emphasised that setting reservation percentages directly impacts the principle of equal opportunity for all citizens under Article 16(1).
The abnormally high volume of applications received during the specified period, the speed, process, manner, and procedure of recommendations, and the automatic inclusion of the mentioned groups (which consist of 99 per cent of Muslims) raise serious concerns about their authenticity and can lead us to conclude that there was a clear state-sponsored appeasement policy in place.
The fundamental constitutional principle of unbiased reservation was clearly breached in this instance, and the state government felt compelled to secure a community vote bank by utilising state resources. While some relief has been provided to the 77 castes eligible for reservation benefits in state services, this appeasement action has also greatly disadvantaged the Muslim community. The relief granted may now face legal challenges in higher courts, subjecting these families to prolonged legal battles.
When appeasement politics infiltrates political parties, as in the current scenario, it has the potential to create policies that do undue favour to a particular section of the community. The state should make policy decisions only after thorough consultations with all stakeholders, avoiding hasty actions. This action by the TMC is only aimed at solidifying the vote bank of the Muslim community and gaining an upper hand in elections in over 22 constituencies.
In a democracy, an error or omission from the politicians is answered through the power of ballots. We have to wait till June 4 to find out how the state reacts to this.
Adarsh Kuniyillam is a policy, political and Parliamentary expert from Kerala. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18’s views.