Madras HC: Why shouldn’t there be reservation for poor in forward communities?

In an order passed this week, Justice N Kirubakaran of the Madras High Court has raised concerns over possible shortcomings of state reservation policies in the context of achieving social justice..Inter alia, the Court asked the state government file its reply on why a reservation system for the benefit of economically backward members of forward communities should not be introduced..The issue was taken up by the judge in the course of hearing a writ petition against the transfer of MBBS seats in government medical colleges meant for Open Competition (OC) category to Backward Caste (BC) and Most Backward Caste (MBC) categories..Senior Advocate Nalini Chidambaram appeared for the petitioners, while Advocate General Vijay Narayan represented the state government..The petitioners had challenged the transfer as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. It has been prayed that state conduct re-counselling for the seats allotted to OC category as per the reservation policy in Tamil Nadu..Reservation for the poor in Forward Communities.In his order, Justice Kirubakaran noted that,.“A poor is a poor whether he or she is from the so-called community called Forward Community or Reserved Categories…The poor, in the so-called forward communities, have been neglected, so far and no one could speak about them fearing protest voices in the name of social justice. Social Justice should be extended to every section of the society.”.It was clarified that the Court was not against the reservation system. However, this does not mean that needful persons from forward communities should be neglected..“The necessity of having reservation for economic and social empowerment of those sections of the society viz., BC, MBC, SC & ST which have been hitherto neglected and oppressed is a must. .At the same time, talking about reservation or extending help to the deserving poor people in Forward Communities should not be viewed or considered as an opposition to the reservation enjoyed by other sections of the society. Further, this Court is aware that in all the communities, there are poor people and they should be encouraged to develop educationally, economically and socially.”.The Court was informed that out of 22 government medical colleges, 31% of the seats were available as OC seats. This was after the state-mandated 69% reservation for Backward Castes and other socially disadvantaged communities. It was further noted that these OC seats can be allotted not only to students belonging to forward communities, but also students belonging to other reserved categories on merit. As a result,.“… only 194 seats reached the students belonging to forward communities which is equivalent to 7.31%.”.Fraudulent elements claiming Reservation benefits.The judge’s attention was also drawn to undeserving candidates obtaining false certificates to claim reservation benefits they are not entitled to..In the statistics furnished before the Court, it was noted that very few communities have been shown as part of the forward community. Justice Kirubakaran remarked,.“If almost every community is sought to be treated as either Backward Community or Most Backward Community, the very purpose of reservation, based on social status and economical status will be of no use..… this Court is aware that many people belonging to forward communities are getting certificates of reserved communities, Backward Community people are getting Most Backward Community, SC/ST certificates and people belonging to Most Backward Community are getting community certificates as SC/ST fraudulently to enjoy the benefits available to those sections of the society, which have been suppressed and oppressed for centuries together.”.For this reason, the Court also saw it fit to direct the government to file its reply on whether the benefits intended for socially backward communities have actually reached the targeted beneficiaries..Queries posed.The judge has directed the government to file its reply to the following questions when the matter is taken up next in the first week of January 2018..How many communities remain as Forward Communities in Tamil Nadu? How many communities shown as OC, BC, MBC, SC,ST in the reserved category?What are all the categories in which the respective reserved communities were originally placed before inclusion in the present reserved category?What is the population of each community in the State of Tamil Nadu? Whether after the extension of benefit of reservation for the targeted communities, those communities have advanced educationally and socially?Whether any assessment/study has been made by the Government to verify whether the benefits of reservation have reached the said communities from 1950 onwards?If it is so, how many studies/assessments have been made so far to note down the difference in the status of the people of those communities before reservation and after the reservation?Whether it is possible to make reservation for the people belonging to Forward Community based on their economic status?Whether the Government is aware that community certificates are obtained fraudulently by design, contrary to the community status and for the purpose of getting benefits of reservation showing them as BC, MBC, SC, ST? If it is so, what are the stringent steps to be taken to prevent such issuance of certificates by having check and balance in every stage?Why not Government appoint an officer not below the rank of Revenue Divisional Officer solely for the purpose of issuing community certificates, specifically including income certificate, nativity certificate etc., so that certificates are issued after proper enquiry?