Quotas cant be permanent…Rakesh Bhatnagar. New Delhi
While Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan wanted a ten-year period for the review of reservations, Justices Arijit Pasayat and CK Thakker felt this exercise should be done after five years. But Justice RV Raveendra, who would have formed a majority view on the subject, struck a different note while being vocal on the adverse effects of caste-based quota policies. Excerpts from what Justice Raveendran ruled:
Reservation as an affirmative action is required only for a limited period to bring forw ard socially and educationally backward classes by giving th em a gentle supportive push.
But if there is no review after a reasonable period and re s ervation is continued, the co u ntry will become a caste-divided society permanently. Instead of developing a united so ciety with diversity, we will end up a fractured society, forever suspicious of each other.
Any provision for reservations is a temporary crutch. Such a crutch by unnecessarily prolonged use should not become a permanent liability. It is significant that the Constitution does not specifically prescribe a casteless society and nor does it try to abolish caste.
But by barring discrimination in the name of caste and by providing for affirmative action, the Constitution seeks to remove the difference in status on the basis of caste.
Caste has divided this country for ages. It has hampered its growth. To have a casteless society will be the realisation of a noble dream. To start with, the effect of reservation may appear to perpetuate caste. The immediate effect of caste-based reservations has been rather unfortunate.
In the pre-reservation era, people wanted to get rid of the backward tagsocial or econ o mic. But now there is a tend e n cy even am ong those considered fo rward, to seek the ba c kw a rd tag in the hope of en j o ying benefits of reservation.