Caste Based Reservation in India

 Reservation in India refers to the practise of reserving seats for a specific group of people in government jobs, educational institutions, and even legislatures. It was affirmative action for the backward and impoverished classes of Indian society, hence it was also known as positive discrimination. Reservation is a contentious issue. Throughout India, you will encounter a significant number of people who are both for and anti-reservation. Even the reservation system has received mixed reviews. The notion of reservation was created to promote one of the Indian constitution's core rights, the Right to Equality, which declares that all citizens are equal before the government.

Castes were split based on the sort of job individuals did in India's social and status structure, i.e., a caste was a group of people who had a common economic vocation. As a result of this hierarchy, there emerged a class of individuals who were treated unfairly because of their predecessors' labour. These classes were not permitted to associate with the so-called higher classes, and they were usually refused access to upper-class luxuries. Among them were the Scheduled Castes (SCs), Schedule Tribes (STs), and others (today known as Other Backward Classes, OBCs). While fighting for India's independence, Gandhiji and other freedom fighters saw the need of bringing these marginalised communities together.

Several other classes, such as SCs and STs, required government aid since they were underrepresented in India's government. Kaka Kalelkar and Dr. B.P. Mandal attempted to categorise these sectors as backward in OBCs on various occasions. Over half of India's population was made up of OBCs. Because they were in the majority, they required representation in government offices, therefore they were given reservations. Because they could now represent their community in decision-making and administrative structures, this contributed to the elevation of these classes.

There were classes among the classes who had previously benefitted from government programmes and upliftment initiatives, which was the issue here. Furthermore, diligent people from the general and forward groups who had properly prepared for jobs were suddenly faced with a large reduction in the number of seats (jobs) available to them. The government invented the concept of the Creamy Layer (backward classes who have previously benefitted and are in excellent social standing) to exempt them from the quota. They also established a maximum restriction on seat bookings, which was set at 50%.

The reservation idea is still in use today. The elevated classes are in a somewhat better position than before, but they still have a long way to go. Reservations are nevertheless essential since these groups have a lesser social standing than the upper classes, and their employment presence is also lower. The number of seats allotted to higher courses, on the other hand, should, in my opinion, be lowered. Indra Sawhney versus Union of India, in which the notion of the creamy layer was identified in 1992, came the Indra Sawhney vs Union of India case. Something similar should be done today.

Furthermore, there is no idea of economic reserve because the economics cannot be used as a valid
basis for reservation. While reservation cannot be completely removed, it can be lowered since persons from the backward classes have a better chance of getting high-level employment (IAS, IPS) than people from the forward classes (assuming they have a similar economic background as there are economically weaker section in general and forward classes). In terms of merit, people from the weaker portions have an edge over those from the stronger sections. Because of the privilege of reserve, a person from a weaker section sometimes receives a job over a person from a forward section who has better merit than him, and many individuals tend to abuse it. Unless stronger restrictions for obtaining jobs can be enforced, this will continue.