So near, yet so far — this is the situation facing the 25 communities which, despite having been included in the Tamil Nadu government’s list of Backward Classes (BCs), Most Backward Classes (MBCs) and Denotified Communities (DNCs), have not found a place in the Central list of Other Backward Classes (OBCs) for the State.
This implies that these communities form part of the general or unreserved category with regard to admission to educational institutions, which come under the control of the Union government and employment at the Centre. But, when it comes to the State government, they are either part of the BCs or MBCs or Backward Class Muslims, for which a scheme of reservation is in place.
The State government has been, at regular intervals, urging the Central authorities to include in their list of OBCs all those who have been left out. At least two communities would have to be mentioned specifically in support of the State government’s request: orphans/destitute children and transgender.
In respect of the former, the government has included them in the list of BCs. It has laid down stipulations that children should have lost their parents before reaching the age of ten; they have no one to take care of them either by law or custom, and they must have been admitted to one of the schools or orphanages run by the State government or recognised by the government.
Persons belonging to the third gender — transgender — have been included in the list of MBCs in the light of the Supreme Court’s direction issued in April 2014 to the Centre and the States to treat such persons as socially and educationally backward and provide them with reservation in education and for public appointments. A year later, the State government included them in the list of MBCs after obtaining the State Backward Classes Commission’s advice. Since then, there has been no addition to any of the three lists for BC, MBC and DNC.
As regards additions to the Central list of the OBCs for Tamil Nadu, there has been no change after the inclusion of certain communities in February 2014.
Stand of CPI(M)
Referring to the exclusion of 25 communities in the Central list of OBCs, K. Balakrishnan, secretary of the State unit of the CPI(M), argues that the communities would stand a greater chance of getting the benefit of 10% quota for economically weaker sections among the general, as they most likely will meet the criteria set for reservation.
“Considering their plight, those who oppose the quota should reconsider their position as these communities are otherwise known as BCs/MBCs,” says the CPI (M) leader.
However, R.S. Bharathi, DMK MP and the petitioner before the Madras High Court against the quota law, does not agree with Mr. Balakrishnan’s position.
“While the factor of class is of paramount importance to the Marxists, it is the question of social justice that is very dear to the Dravidian movement and my party. We, in the DMK, are clear in our opposition to the inclusion of economic criterion as the basis for reservation,” he adds. A former secretary of the State Department for BCs/MBCs/DNCs says that as a way of placating the sentiments of OBCs, the Centre could consider recruiting the “creamy layer” Other Backward Classes candidates in the event of vacancies in the reserved posts or seats. This will ensure that there are no vacancies at the end of a given year for the reserved posts, he adds.
