BEGINNING OF INDIA’S AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAMME

The debate about affirmative action in India, has been about whether such action is a
blessing which brings equality among all people of the society or is a curse which a reason
for all evils of discrimination in the society. The chief architect of independent Indian
Constitution, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar who made sure that affirmative action was constitutionally
mandated, did not look at affirmative action as a blessing. He was not of the thought that
caste system could be made less evil. According to him “….his ideal society would be one
which is based on Liberty, Equality and Fraternity and the cast system on the other hand
means a state of slavery…, a society in which some men are forced to accept from others the
purposes which control their conduct.”1 He was constantly engaged with the question of
approaches which would lead to eradication of caste altogether.

However, the affirmative action in India is primarily caste-based, along with some
affirmative action which is gender biased, for instance there is a special provision for women
in electoral sphere. The affirmative action in India is argumentative for three reasons. Firstly,
there is a substantial debate over valuation of caste inequalities which is the prima facie
reason for the existence of affirmative action and whether these reasons are significant at all;
if yes then to what extent and in which sphere; and whether these reasons have been
narrowing over time. Secondly, there is larger debate about whether caste is the valid
indicator of backwardness or should affirmative action be determined based on class or
income or other social indicators such as religion. Thirdly, there is another huge debate about
whether the affirmative action is required at all, in any form, irrespective of which social
identity is used as in anchor.

EVIDENCE BASED STUDY OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN INDIA

However, since the debates about affirmative actions are influenced by emotions, it is
important to take a look at the evidence based study of the affirmative action in India.
Available national data on caste are determined by needs of affirmative action programme.
This affirmative action used to divide the population initially into three, and now into four
broad groups. Those are Scheduled Castes (ex untouchable jatis , SC), on average about
eighteen percent of the Indian population; Scheduled Tribes (ST), on average about eight
percent of the Indian population; Other Backward Classes (OBSs, a heterogeneous

1
Ashwini Desshpande, Social Justice through Affirmative Action in India: An assessment ( Jennette Wicks-
Lim and Robert Polin, 2012 )
collection of Hindu low castes, some non-Hindu communities and some tribes which are not
included in STs) constitute forty three percent of the rural population and thirty nine
percent of the urban population and Others (the residual; everyone else). This data does not
allow us to isolate the upper castes. It also needs to be emphasised that such a calculation
based on such a classification will underestimate the differences between two ends of jati
spectrum.

CASTE BASED AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN INDIA

The notion of preferential treatment for caste and tribal groups seeming to be the
lowest in social and economic hierarchy pre-exists Indian independence. The constitution of
the independent India continued the idea of preferential policies, declared untouchability
illegal and promoted the ideal of a casteless society.

Systematic inter-caste disparities

The data from a variety of sources on the living standards, health status, poverty rates,
educational attainment and occupational outcomes show that the inequalities between
Scheduled Cates and Scheduled Tribes on one hand and non- Other Backward Classes (which
is a loose proxy for the upper castes) are persistent and systematic.

Social Discrimination

There are enough evidences that clearly brings forth the various aspects of rejection,
exclusion and stigmatization, that Dalits continue to face in the modern India.2 In the rural
India, although there is a breakdown of traditional subsistence economy, yet caste continues
to exert its strong impact in many different dimensions.

An extensive survey was carried out in the year 2001-2002 in five hundred and sixty
five villages across eleven states based on the results of which a report called Shah et al.
(2006) document was made. In this report it was found that untouchability is not only present
all over rural India, but has now “survived by adapting to new socio-economic realities and
taking on new and insidious forms.”

Another latest comprehensive study was done on untouchability in one thousand five
hundred and eighty nine villages in Gujarat which documented ninety eight types of
untouchability practices done by non-Dalits towards the Dalits. For instance, tea stalls

2
Human Rights Watch (1999).
were found keeping separate cups for Dalit customers which they have to wash themselves,
not buying milk or vegetables from Dalit vendors, making Dalit children sit at the back of the
classroom and so on. While the breaking of caste norms for marriage is not quite well-known,
the nastiest social punishments are kept for the marriage between a Dalit man and a woman
of upper caste.

Though the Urban India might have rarer evident cases of untouchability, but for a
practice which has been outlawed for over six decades now, it is unusually strong and
continues to exist in various forms.

Economic Discrimination

Average wages for the reserved categories i.e. the Scheduled Castes and Others differ
across all occupation categories. The fact that the two groups enter the labour market with
considerable disparities in levels of education indicates pre-market discrimination. There are
enough cases which document the considerable disparities between the Scheduled Castes,
Scheduled Tribes and Others in access to education, quality of education and access to
resources that could improve learning, and also of vigorous discrimination inside schools by
teachers.3 Even if there were no active labour market discrimination, such pre-market
discrimination ensures that outcomes will necessarily be unequal.

The evidence on the existence of caste-based economic discrimination is more

shocking and surprising in the urban areas, more specifically in the modern, formal sector
jobs than in the rural areas. In the rural areas the individuals are more simply recognised by
their caste and they are more intended to pursue occupation based on their caste as the
modern day, formal sector are not more inclined to give jobs to the people of the lower caste.

In the urban settings, caste is supposed to be anonymous since it is not identified

according to the occupation they pursue. Moreover, urban markets are supposed to respond
according to merit. So even if caste could be identified hypothetically, it should not matter.

Exactly similar resumes were sent to private companies both MNCs and domestic
companies, in response to newspaper advertisements in New Delhi during 2005-2006 for the
first major correspondence study in India on economic discrimination. The only differences
in the resumes were the names of applicants which were easily identifiable as Hindu upper
castes, Hindu Dalit and Muslims. The result of the study brought forth the considerable

3
Nambissan 2007
differences in call-backs between the Hindu upper castes and other two categories. The
disparity between caste and gender was also looked into and it was found that the Dalit
women received the lowest call-backs.

In the picture of unambiguous evidence on discrimination, affirmative action becomes

essential to guarantee representation of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other
Backward Classes in preferred positions. Though it is to be seen that, affirmative action is not
a complete remedy to wipe out discrimination in India for a fact that affirmative action is
only applicable to public sector and not private sector, which in the present day economy of
India is gaining more importance.

ASSESSMENT OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAMME IN MATTERS OF MERIT

The affirmative action measures are most commonly criticised as they go against the
consideration of merit and efficiency by letting the candidates have access to preferred
position in higher education and public sector jobs to which they could not have access
otherwise. Merit is generally conducted as if merit is a neutral, objective characteristic,
independent of the standard used to measure it.