CSDE Occasional Paper Series – 1/2016
Hermeneutics of Dalit Sub-Classification in India*
Yagati Chinna Rao
Centre for the Study of Discrimination and Exclusion
School of Social Sciences
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi – 110067.
Hermeneutics of Dalit Sub-Classification in India*
Yagati Chinna Rao
Centre for the Study of Discrimination and Exclusion
School of Social Sciences
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi – 110067.
Caste has long been an important dimension of political mobilization in India, particularly
so in the domain of electoral politics. In the post colonial period, caste has assumed an
active role in Indian society and has become the topic for intense debates, triggered by
various Commissions on reservations and their recommendations. The policy of
reservation in India has been the bone of contention and conflict in different circles
ranging from academics and politics to the civil society, and the politics of reservation is
also articulated through literary and cultural debates. What is significant is that in recent
times the conflict in contemporary society across the country has witnessed a shift from
being one between the reserved and non-reserved categories to that within the reserved
communities. This intra-caste conflagration amongst the reserved communities has been
fuelled to a great extent by the state and its political powermongers. Thus, the Dalit
movement during the post-colonial period is confronted with a dual paradoxical dilemma
of having to forge Dalit unity against the oppressive upper castes and also to engage with
the divisive forces emanating from within the Dalits.
As per the Constitution, the term Scheduled Castes denotes specifically the list
prepared by the President under Article 341. There is no reference to any subclassification or division in the above mentioned list. From Article 341, it is also clear that
except for a limited power for exclusion or inclusion in the list by an Act of Parliamen,t
there is no provision to sub-divide, sub-classify or sub-group the castes listed in the
Presidential List of Scheduled Castes. Therefore, it is evident that the Constitution
conceived the entire listed castes to be members of one overarching group for the purpose
of the Article 15 and Clause (4) of Article 16 of the Constitution of India. A further
classification by way of sub-classification is not constitutionally mandated or even
1
permissible. The current discourse of sub-classification of Dalits, thus, poses
simultaneously an old question and a new challenge. Although it has been there amidst us
as an existential reality from times immemorial, but the magnitude of the crisis that has
now unfolded is a relatively new occurrence. It should be mentioned in passing that there
is reservation of seats for Scheduled Castes in the House of People, i.e., the Lok Sabha,
and in all State Assemblies, under Article 330, but there is no reservation in Rajya Sabha
and State Legislative Councils, despite a persistent demand for extension of reservation
since a longtime.
The Issue of Identities
The issue of identity or identification of untouchables has been a recurrent theme both during
the colonial and post-colonial period. The creation of a label or nomenclature to identify the
Indian untouchables has witnessed several changes over the years, and each time when a new
nomenclature emerged it added new a salient dimension to Dalit identity. This dynamic
reinvention of identities, as indicated by the nomenclature, is more characteristic in the
history of the untouchables than of any other social category in India and it is intertwined
with the intellectual developments in a wider milieu. While caste or sub-caste (or jati)
identity exists within their own communities, homogeneous categories were deployed by
various agencies expressing generic identity of untouchables that cut across regional and
intra untouchable distinctions.
It is useful to understand the evolution of these multiple identities / nomenclatures in
a historical context.
Historically, broadly four major categories of nomenclatures among
Dalits can be discerned.1 First is their own caste identities or jati, such as Jatav, Chamar,
Mala, Madiga, Mang, Mahar and so on, which emanate from the lore of their community
traditions or mythical lore like caste legends, explaining their origins and status. Second is
their structural exclusion and inferior status indicated by Brahmanical texts through names
like Atchut, Asprishya, Antyaja, Chandala, Asuras, Dasas, or Dasyas, Raksasas, Pariah,2
‘Harijans’ and Panchamas etc. The third category of nomenclature were terms like Depressed
Classes, Exterior Castes and Scheduled Castes and so on, that was the result of the
administrative and political policies of the colonial and post-colonial States, and had a
2
decisive impact in terms of political and social discourse. During the colonial period they
were known by various terms like Depressed Classes, Harijans, and Scheduled Castes which
were political responses to multifarious compulsions ranging from official documentation
necessitated by the colonial structure, to the cultural movements by the caste Hindu and
untouchable communities. In the post-colonial period they were officially given the name
Scheduled Castes, as we have mentioned earlier. Finally, comes the category of generic
identities that the ex-untouchables themselves adopted. These can be divided in two
categories each pertaining to different periods. One was in the early decades of the twentieth
century, precisely in 1920s, which witnessed the emergence of the Adi identity that centred
around the “Adi” ideology. This propagated that they were the original inhabitants of this
land and consequently the rest of the populace should be regarded as outsiders, or
immigrants. These self-reclaimed identities were the Adi-Andhra in the Telugu speaking
regions of Madras presidency, the Adi-Hindu in the Nizam dominions, the Adi-Dravida in
the Tamil speaking regions of the Madras presidency, and “Adi-Hindu” in the United
Province, Bhumi-Putra in Maharashtra and so on across the country. The second generic
identity was the concept known as ‘Dalit’ that came into vogue in 1972 in Maharashtra with
the formation of Dalit Panthers Movement. Dalit literally means trampled, squeezed crushed
or broken, or reduced in to pieces,3 and politically is a symbol of change and revolution. A
new antinomianism saw the birth of a radical ex-untouchable. This was a Dalit who believed
in humanism, and who rejected the existence of God, rebirth, soul and sacred books that
taught discrimination, fate and heaven. Since many oppressive shackles that have made him
slave existed in society, the Dalit represented the exploited in the country.4 Therefore Dalit is
a more secular identity than any other category. Although originally it usually denoted a class
rather than a caste identity, but currently it is being used politically in the debates and
discourses among the academia as a synonym for all ex-untouchables.
The Historical Roots of ‘Scheduled Castes’
It would be pertinent to briefly recapitulate the history of the nomenclature ‘Scheduled
Caste’. Untouchability with its manifold manifestations is rooted in the religious and
cultural notion of purity and pollution which is believed to have developed in the later
3
Vedic period when the Brahmanic literature emerged in the form of smrits, samhitas and
the Upanishads. The advent of the British rule ushered in crucial transformations, albeit
the policies of the colonial government towards Dalits initially were not guided by clearlyspelled policies or motivated by a conscious political endeavour. The benefits that accrued
to the Dalits could be referred as ‘unintended positive effects’ of a policy that was not
specifically formulated for that purpose. The first definite and deliberate attempt to
ascertain the population of the untouchables was made by the Census Commissioner in
1911. The Census Superintendents of different Provinces were instructed by the Census
Commissioner to draw separate enumeration of castes and tribes classed as Hindus but
who did not conform to certain standards and were subject to certain disabilities.
According to these tests the Census Superintendents made separate enumerations
of castes and tribes. The criteria for official enumerations were as follows:
(1)denied the supremacy of the Brahmins; (2) did not receive the Mantra
from Brahmin or other recognized Hindu Guru; (3) denied the authority of
the Vedas; (4) did not worship the great Hindu Gods; (5) were not served
by good Brahmins; (6) have no Brahman priests at all; (7) have no access
to the interior of the ordinary Hindu temple; (8) cause pollution; (9) bury
their dead; and (10) eat beef and do not revere the cow.
The investigation conducted by the Census Commissioners left no room for
guessing. In 1930, the Indian Statutory Commission defined that originally these castes
seemed to be partly functional groups comprising those who followed occupations described
as unclean or degrading, such as scavenging, leather working and partly tribal i.e., aboriginal
tribes absorbed into Hindu fold and transformed into an imposed caste.5 With regard to issue
of identity / nomenclature Dr. B.R. Ambedkar pointed out that “the existing nomenclature of
Depressed Classes is objected by the members of the Depressed Classes who have given
thought to it and also by outsiders who take interest in them”.6 Ambedkar criticized the usage
of such nomenclature and argued that “it has degrading and contemptuous” connotation and
instead suggested that “they should be called ‘non-caste Hindus’, ‘protestant Hindus’ or
‘non-conformist Hindus’ or some such designation”.7
4
The term “exterior castes” appeared for the first time in the 1931 census of India.
This term for the Hindu castes hitherto known as Depressed was originally suggested by C.S.
Mullan, the Census Superintendent for Assam and was adopted in the census report of 1931
as the most satisfactory alternative to the label ‘depressed class’. It has been criticized as
being the same term as ‘outcaste’ only of five instead of two syllables, and it must be
admitted that ‘exterior’ is but old ‘out’ writ large. At the same time it is here submitted that
outcaste, with an e, has not unnaturally attracted to its connotation the implications of the
quite differently derived outcast, with no e. Outcaste, if correctly interpreted, seems to mean
not more than one who is outside the caste system and is therefore not admitted to Hindu
society. But in practice the exterior castes also contained those who had been cast out from
the Hindu social body for some breach of caste rules ‘outcaste’ and ‘outcast’ were in some
cases synonymous and the derogatory implications of obliquity attaching to the latter term.
Hence, it unjustly coloured the former, a taint which is not conveyed by its substitution with
the word ‘exterior’, which may connote exclusion but not extrusion.8
The instructions of the Government of India for conducting this Census (1931)
concluded with a rejoinder that, “the Government of India also desired that attention be paid
to the collection of information conducive to a better knowledge of the backward and
depressed classes and of the problem involved in their present and future welfare”.9 It was
explained that the “depressed castes” were those whose contact would prompt purification
rites on the part of high caste Hindus. It was not intended that the term should have any
reference to occupation as such. But it referred to those castes who, by virtue of their
traditional position in Hindu society are denied access to temples or have to use separate
wells or not allowed to sit inside a school building and have to remain outside or suffer
similar social disabilities. These disabilities vary in degree in different parts of India with
south of India reporting more severe forms. At the same time, the castes which belong to this
class are generally known as and can in most parts of India be listed for a definite area,
though perhaps the lists for India as a whole may not coincide.10
The question of the preparation of lists for each province was discussed at a meeting
of the Superintendents of Census operations in January 1931 before the census took place. It
5
was decided that each province should prepare a list of castes who suffered disability on
account of their low social status and on account of being debarred from temples, schools or
wells. Neither was a specific definition of depressed castes framed nor was a precise
instruction issued to the superintendents of census operations, because it was realized that
conditions varied so much from province to province and even from district to district within
some provinces. Thus, it was thought unwise to tie down the superintendents of census
operations with too meticulous instructions. The general method of procedures prescribed
was that of local enquiry as to which castes were held to be depressed and the causal reasons
in the framing of a list accordingly.
The Census of India 1931 has played a decisive role, at least in the case of Dalit
history, for several reasons. Census reports prior to 1931 suffered great limitations and were
merely estimations. Each new estimate either suggested increase in their strength or added to
the conflicting statements. For instance, the census commissioner in 1921 gave what he
described as minimum number of the Depressed Classes in various provinces and estimated a
total of 52,680,000.11 This figure he stated, “must be taken as low estimate”, since it does
not include all those who should have been included, and he said that, “we may confidently
place” the numbers of these Depressed Classes, all of whom are considered impure, at
something between 55 and 60 millions in India proper.” Out of the 52.6 millions for which
the Census Commissioner gave actual figures, less than 43.5 million were to be found in
British-India. This figure agrees fairly with the 42 million given as the figures of depressed
classes by the Franchise Committee of 1919. It is also not at great variance with 44.5 million
estimated by the Nair Central Committee of 1929 as the figure of Depressed Classes in
British-India. However, it varies considerably from the Hartog Committees figure of an
approximate 30 million. These estimations by the governmental agencies were related to
specific administrative purposes. For instance, the data prescribed by the Seventh
Quinquenniel Review was to prepare a programme for the educational uplift of Depressed
Classes, while the data collected by the Home department was intended for partial
implementation of the resolution moved in the Imperial Legislative Council regarding the
general amelioration of the Dalits. Thus, such estimations were indubitably mere
approximate figures. The 1931 census decided to procure more definite figures than the
6
estimations hitherto employed. However, they found it difficult to arrive at an accurate
number of Dalits. It needs to be noted that though the expression “Depressed Classes” had
been in usage prior to 1931, it was neither conceptualized nor clearly defined. In the process
of ascertaining the definite number of Depressed Classes, they prepared a “schedule” with
certain criteria.
Criteria for Scheduled Castes
The fundamental question in relation to the lists of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes arises with regard to the basis on which a community is listed so. As far as the
official category Scheduled Castes is concerned, this term appeared officially for the first
time in the Government of India Act, 1935. In April 1936, the British Government issued
the Government of India (Scheduled Castes) Order, specifying certain castes, races and
tribes as Scheduled Castes in the-then provinces of Assam, Bengal, Bihar, Bombay,
Central Provinces & Berar, Madras, Orissa, Punjab and United Provinces. Prior to the
Government of India Act, 1935, the term used for these communities was Depressed
Classes. We have mentioned earlier the criterion employed in the 1911 Census to
distinguish ‘Depressed Classes’ from the rest of the population. The Census Report of
1931 mentioned the following terms for classifying certain castes as Depressed Classes
and prepared a “schedule” of these communities:12
(1) Whether the caste or class in question can be served by the barbers, water
carriers, tailors, etc., who serve the caste-Hindus; (2) Whether the caste or
class in question can be served by clean Brahmin or not; (3) Whether the
caste in question pollutes a high caste Hindu by contact or by proximity; (4)
Whether the caste or class in question is one from whose hands a caste Hindu
can take water; (5) Whether the caste or class in question is debarred from
using public conveniences, such as roads, ferries, wells or schools; (6)
Whether the caste or class in question is debarred from the use of Hindu
temples; (7) Whether in ordinary social inter-course a well educated member
of the caste or class in question is treated as an equal by high caste; (8)
Whether the caste or class in question is merely depressed on account of its
7
own ignorance, illiteracy or poverty and but for that would be subject to no
social disability and;(9) Whether it is depressed on account of the occupation
followed and whether but for that occupation it would be subject to no social
disability.
The above basis of categorization of certain communities as Scheduled Castes
shows that those communities which were socially, educationally and economically
backward on account of the traditional practice of untouchability were grouped together
and listed invariably as a homogeneous category. The sole criterion and binding force for
these communities in the Scheduled Caste List is nothing but untouchalility and the
investigation conducted by the Census Commissioners was unambiguous about this
determining criterion. The above mentioned tests were implemented by the Census
operators importantly to obtain the exact number of Dalits. Though these tests were
problematic in terms of the module of classifications, the complex diversity, specific local
characteristics and the very modus operandi of obtaining such information, a significant
shift was the using of disability or discrimination as the crucial indicator. It is at least clear
that the above mentioned forms of backwardness were incidental to the definition process.
The insufficiency of any single module to identify the untouchables provoked a variety of
responses to the Franchise (Lothian) Committee.13 However, the majority of the
Committee, adhering to the basic criterion i.e., denial of access to temples and causing
pollution by touch or approach as generally accepted tests of untouchability, reiterated its
conviction that the Depressed Class should include only such untouchables and not those
Hindus who were only economically poor and in other ways backward, but not regarded
as “untouchables”.14 All those untouchable groups were listed i.e., in other words
“scheduled” in 1936 for the purposes of giving effect to the provisions for special
electoral representations in the Government of India Act, 1935. These “scheduled” groups
of communities were later designated as Scheduled Castes, and the designation was
adopted by the Indian Constitution for legal and official purposes.
8
It would be relevant to mention Article 341, which governs the listing of castes in
the Schedule of the Constitution:
(1) The President15 [may with respect to any State16 [or Union territory],
and where it is a State,17 after consultation with the Governor18 thereof] by
public notification,19 specify the castes, races or tribes or parts of or group
within castes, races or tribes which shall for the purposes of this
Constitution be deemed to be Scheduled Castes in relation to that State20
[or Union territory, as the case may be].
(2) Parliament may by law include in or exclude from the list of Scheduled
Castes specified in a notification issued under clause (1) Any caste, race or
tribe or part of or group within any caste, race or tribe, but save as
aforesaid a notification issued under the said clause shall not be varied by
any subsequent notification.
Thus, under the Provisions of the Article 341 of the Constitution, for the first time
a list of Scheduled Castes in relation to a State/UT, was made by a notified order of the
President and any subsequent modifications in the list can be made only by an Act of
Parliament. The present Article 341 was discussed in the Constituent Assembly as Draft
Article 300A on September 17, 1949. While introducing the Article, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar
said:21
“The objective of these two articles, as I stated, was to eliminate the
necessity of burdening the Constitution with long lists of Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes. It is now proposed that the President, in consultation
with the Governor or Ruler of a State should have the power to issue a
general notification in the Gazette specifying all the castes and tribes or
groups thereof deemed to be Scheduled Castes and Scheduled tribes for the
purpose of the privileges which have been defined for them in the
Constitution. The only limitation that has been imposed is this: that once a
notification has been issued by the President, which, undoubtedly, … will
be issuing in consultation with and on the advice of the Government of
each State, thereafter, if any elimination was to be made from the List so
notified or any addition was to be made, that must be made by Parliament
and not by the President. The object is to eliminate any kind of political
factors having a play in the matter of the disturbance in the Schedule so
published by the President.”
9
The observations of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar continue to be relevant today in so far as
the role of the ‘Executive’ in reinforcing the Scheduled Castes list is concerned.
Therefore, the founding fathers of the Constitution squarely placed the responsibility on
the Parliament for the exclusion or inclusion of castes in the list.
Historical Context of Sub-Classification
As mentioned earlier the formation of a cluster of communities under the generic identity
of “Scheduled Castes” over the period of time and the rise and growth of these
communities have shown a differential development in the spheres of socio-political, and
economic development. For instance the Mahars in Maharashtra, Malas in Andhra,
Pariahs in Tamil Nadu, and Chamars in Uttar Pradesh are relatively better off than other
competing communities within the Scheduled Castes. This witnessed a tenuous
relationship between various discrete communities leading to disputes, allegations, and
counter-allegations to such an extent over a period of time that leadership of Ambedkar as
member of the leading community among the Dalits came to be questioned. The Mahars,
although numerically the largest among the Scheduled Castes of Maharashtra, but
commonly functioning as village servants, provided a variety of services for the village,
some of which were highly polluting, like the flaying of carcasses. They were forced by
their abject poverty to eat carrion and it lowered their status considerably. The other major
untouchable castes of Maharashtra were the Mangs (rope-makers) and the Chambhars
(leather-workers) who were economically better-off than the Mahars as they pursued
traditional occupations and this restricted their contact with the caste Hindus. More so
because, they were independent of the caste Hindus, unlike the Mahars, in a way the
Chambhars particularly felt that they were superior to the Mahars in the hierarchy. The
Mangs and Chambhars often allege that Ambedkar focused his attention upon his own
caste fellows, i.e., the Mahars. They believe that the Mahars’ upward mobility was
because of Ambedkar’s efforts due to which they got a disproportionate share of benefits
that should have been rightly dispersed among all Scheduled Caste groups. This was
particularly in the case of watan inam22 wherein Ambedkar played a major role that
affected mainly the Mahar community.23 This was partly because the Mahar as village
10
servant, who during the colonial period was transformed into the lowest government
functionary, was bound to the village as a whole. Ambedkar perceived it as caste bondage
and felt that if the watan was abolished, the Mahar could be freed from the oppressive ties
to the village.
However, Ambedkar, throughout his career, emerged as a representative of the
Dalits as a whole, rather than a parochial agent or a Mahar leader. Although Ambedkar
hardly referred to Mahars in his addresses, argumentation and formulation of ideas
influenced by his experience and background in particular instances were misconstrued as
excessive concern for Mahars. For instance on March 20 1927, a conference was
organized by the Kolaba District Depressed Classes, and he asked them to improve their
general demeanour, with a specific Mahar oriented injunction, “…take a vow from this
movement to renounce eating carrion…”24 It needs to be noted that due to some
injunctions from Ambedkar he was often labeled as a Mahar leader. Such misconceptions
in a highly politicized context were to have adverse impact on credibility of Ambedkar
who worked hard for the overall emancipation of all the Dalits.25
The intensified internal conflict among the Dalits was reflected in the deliberations
of the Round Table Conference (here after RTC). Politically this was articulated by the
Congress, especially Gandhi who refused to acknowledge Ambedkar as a spokesperson of
the entire Dalit community while projecting himself of possessing moral and genuine
claims to represent them. When Ambedkar tried to convince Gandhi about his point that
“the Congress had not so far done anything tangible for the Depressed Classes” the latter
refused to accept such claims.26 Ambedkar at the Minorities Committee repudiated the
Congress claim to speak on behalf of the so called “Depressed Classes” and insisted on
separate electorates and special representation like other minorities, at the RTC.27 At this
juncture Gandhi and the Congress prompted rebel untouchable sub-castes to create an
alternative leadership from among the untouchables, to speak on behalf of the Congress.
This was evident at a meeting of the Depressed Classes of Bombay suburbs held at Lower
Parel which “passed a resolution expressing full confidence in Mahatma Gandhi and
repudiating Dr. Ambedkar’s claim to represent all the ‘Depressed’ Classes”.28 Similar
11
instances resurfaced in Punjab,29 Banaras,30 and other places where certain communities
expressed confidence in Gandhi instead of Ambedkar. However, the Depressed Classes’
delegates at RTC, London, stated that they had received 54 telegrams from members of
the Depressed Classes from different parts of India, including Gandhi’s land Ahmadabad
protesting against Gandhi’s claim to representation of the Depressed Classes and
expressed confidence in Ambedkar and Srinivasan, besides demanding special
representation by provision for separate electorates.31 But by then considerable internal
tension was precipitated because of the political maneuvering by Gandhi and Congress
which had the advantage of material resources and institutional tactics. In the years after
RTC, one could notice Gandhi’s sudden love for untouchables that manifested in “Harijan
Tours”, Harijan Sevek Sanghs, in which he played a major role by accommodative politics
and selective appropriation of the then-activists of untouchable leaders in their respective
regions across the country. All these developments did not go unnoticed. Ambedkar was
suspicious and concerned about such maneuvers and noted “the policy of the Congress
and the Hindu Mahasabha of creating leaders for the Depressed Class for their own
purposes and by their own propaganda and then trying to foist them on the Depressed
Classes”.32
Gandhi’s reformist endeavours and politics of ‘inclusion’ of Depressed Classes
culminated into a ‘Harijan movement’ that became a major national campaign between
1932 and 1936.33 One of the major fallout of this ‘Harijan’ movement of Congress in
general and Gandhi in particular was the encouragement of ‘nationalist’ anti-Ambedkarite
Dalit organizations,34 most notably the All-India Depressed Classes League in Kanpur,35
and the Bihar Khet Mazdoor Sabha, both under the leadership of Jagjivan Ram, and aimed
against Ambedkar’s leadership. As mentioned above, the Harijan Sevak Sanghs emerged
in the post RTC conferences and more particularly they evolved out of the Poona Pact. A
hastily called meeting of caste Hindu representatives in Bombay on September 25, 1932,
presided over by Madan Mohan Malaviya, called on caste Hindus to “secure by legitimate
and peaceful means an early removal of the social disabilities of untouchability, including
temple entry”.36 On 30th September, a public meeting resolved to set up an “All India
Untouchability League” seeking to get opened the public wells, roads, schools, and
12
crematoriums for them. The League was set up with a constitution adopted at Delhi on
26th October 1932 and later on Gandhi changed the name from League to Harijan Sevak
Sangh. But Ambedkar opposed the League/Sangh on two counts. First he insisted that the
goal of any organization working on the problems of the Dalits should not simply be the
“removal of untouchability” but the eradication of caste system itself; and secondly he
insisted that the leadership should be in the hands of untouchables. These demands as
usual were not accepted by Gandhi because for Gandhi, the primary purpose of the Sangh
was not to be an organization of Dalits for emancipation but a body for the reform of
Hinduism.37 The differences between Ambedkar and Gandhi that began at the RTC got
crystallized in the post-Poona Pact years and Congress implemented its ‘agenda’ to create
alternate leadership and anti-Ambedkarite organizations through ‘Harijan’ programmes.
By creating alternative leadership to Ambedkar, the Congress successfully fostered
sharp differences amongst the different untouchable communities and they got widened in
the following years. Ambedkar on many occasions pleaded for unity among Dalits and
made conscious efforts to demonstrate that he was not discriminating against any group.
While addressing a meeting at R.M. Bhat High School, Parel, Bombay, presided by M.V.
Donde, Ambedkar said “it was regrettable that there should be difference of opinion
among the different sections of the depressed classes.” He said the work he did was “not
meant for a particular section but for the benefit of the whole community”.38 Perhaps
Congress and Gandhi were alarmed. They saw a potential threat in Ambedkar whose
ideological difference was emphatic and clearly stated “the goal of the Depressed Classes
is sharing of the power of the Government of the country”. He warned his community that
“great obstacles were Gandhi and the Hindus who accepted the demand of the Muslims
for a due share in the Government, but they had not accepted a similar demand made by
the Depressed Classes”.39 Ambedkar believed and made it clear to the British Government
that Hindus, Muslims and other communities including depressed classes only could make
a real “National Government”, and he demanded their share in power by emphasizing that
“the Depressed Classes did not lag behind any other community in their love for India’s
freedom but they wanted the independence of their community along with the
independence of the country”.40
13
On his way to Matang Conference, Dr. Ambedkar delivered a speech at Sholapur,
Karkam district on 31st December 1937:41
".. First, it is a misfortune for all of us that there is no unity among the
various castes such as Mahar, Chambhar, Bhangi etc. prevailing among the
untouchables. The real reason for absence of this unity is the existence of
caste distinction (jati-bhed) in the Hindu society. Mahars, Mangs,
Chambhars or Bhangis are not responsible for this caste discrimination.
Caste discrimination is the gutter of dirty water (gatar gangaa) coming
flowing to us from above. This is the hell (narak) flowing towards us. And
because of this, we have to face the bitter fruits and its consequences. The
painful part of it is that, Hindus, not only do not remove the caste
discrimination among themselves, but on the contrary, they strive for
strengthening the differences among the untouchables, taking undue
advantage of their ignorance. They support Mangs and raise them against
Mahars; they support Chambhars and raise them against Mahars and
Mangs. They spread their policy of discrimination among us and thus
prevent our unity. Though the original responsibility of the caste distinction
is on Hindu society, for us, to forget our responsibility would be suicidal. It
is our foremost duty to remove the caste distinctions among ourselves and
prevent the entry of policy of discrimination among us. Unless we achieve
this, we would never prosper. We must completely abolish the ban on
inter-dining and inter marriage among the Mahars and Mangs etc. If every
caste sticks to its own caste for its pride, if Mahars remain Mahar and
Mangs remain Mang, we would not be able to fight the injustice against us.
What is there so great about the names Mahar and Mang, that you should
feel proud of it? What bright history comes in front of your eyes by
uttering these names, so that you should strive for preserving old
traditions? The entire society is considering these names contemptible.
Today you have no value even equal to that of garbage in the rubbish junk.
So you must not have any pride for these names. You should understand
that both our societies are getting crushed under one common grinding
stone, and work unitedly. Talking about Mahars, about this, they are not
willing to follow any caste distinction. They are ready to have inter-dinning
and inter- marrying with Mangs, Chambhars or Bhangis. And if they are
hesitant, I undertake that I will compel them for it. "
Despite Ambedkar’s efforts to foster unity among the Dalits and to consolidate
their strength, the process of divisions initiated by the Congress and Gandhi was
successful as indicated in the election where Ambedkar was defeated by a 7th pass
candidate.42 In the First Lok Sabha elections, held under the new Constitution of India
14
Republic, the Congress candidate N.S. Kajrolkar, a Chambhar by caste defeated
Ambedkar.43
Gandhi went on establishing Harijan Sevak Sanghs across the country in his
‘Harijan’ tour of 1930s. Karnataka was in the forefront of the Harijan movement.
Branches of this Sangh were started in Bijapur, Belgaum, Karwar, Mangalore, Coorg,
Bellary, with Hubli as the headquarters.44 By conducting Harijan bhajans, temperance and
sanitation, and medical relief camps through Sanghs, the Congress accommodated all the
then workers of the Depressed Classes and pitched them in its Hinduistic mode of reform
besides preparing them to oppose Ambedkar.
In Jagjivan Ram’s own Bihar the post emergency (1975-77) Socialist Movement
initially weaned away non-Chamar castes like Dushad and Paswan and threw up onChamar leaders like Ramvilas Paswan. Jagjivan Ram himself became a part of the antiCongress Janata Party and shifted Chamars to that fold. Ever since then the Chamars of
Bihar remained with Janata Party and its later variants like Lalu Prasad’s Rashtriya Janata
Dal, whereas a good chunk of them also shifted to Bahujan Samaj Party of Kanshi Ram.
These seeds of division continued even in the post-colonial times. Dalit leaders
who belonged to the first generation educated stream were accommodated into the
Congress Party during the 1930s. Arigay Ramaswamy and B.S. Venkata Rao were the
first to be accommodated.45 And Naralasetti Devendrudu and Vemula Kurmayya were
made Joint Secretaries of the Harijan Sevak Sangh. In fact these leaders were earlier
active and played a major role in Adi-Andhra movement of 1920s.46 Mala leaders were
the first beneficiaries of the accommodative politics of the Congress party. But the postcolonial Madiga sub-caste leadership sought political space and tried to exploit the
Congress antipathy towards Ambedkar and his Scheduled Castes Federation (SCF)47
which had a significant presence in Andhra Pradesh till late 1960s. For this purpose they
equated themselves with the Chamars of North India and claimed the same sub-caste
lineage with the powerful Scheduled Caste leader of the Congress party, Babu Jagjivan
Ram. Madigas’ desire for political space took them to such a position that they discarded
Ambedkar as their leader. The Madiga Reservation Movement that took shape in the
15
1990s continued in the same strand and promptly elevated Jagjivan Ram as an equal to
Ambedkar for the purpose of their agitation. To reinforce their claims they started erecting
statues of Jagjivan Ram and demanded a public holiday for his birthday. Meira Kumar,
daughter of Jagjivan Ram and a Congress leader, added fuel to such claims and
encouraged Madiga Congress leaders during her tenure as Congress General Secretary in
charge of Andhra Pradesh affairs during 1990-92. Later, during her tenure as Union
Minister for Social Justice and Empowerment (2004-2009) her role became very crucial in
continuing the same position, which was encouraging and working for separate Madiga
reservation in Andhra Pradesh at the Central Government level. This was probably for the
same parochial reasons since Madigas were the only Scheduled Castes who elevated Babu
Jagjivan Ram as a leader equal to Ambedkar while her own caste people, the Chamars
have discarded Jagjivan Ram in North India.48
However, Dalits have been divided not only on sub-caste lines but also on party
lines. In the post-colonial period, primarily three types of divisions were perceptible:
firstly accommodation of Dalit leaders in major political parties; encouraging Dalit
associations as their sister organizations, and thirdly splitting Dalit organizations and
converting them into their cadre organizations. Dalit politics of contemporary Andhra
society is an important case that exposes this complex development. To cite a more
concrete example, one leader of a particular group of one of the major sub-castes is an ally
of the thent Chief Minister Dr. Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy of Congress and another leader of
the same sub-caste group is with G.V. Harsha Kumar of Congress, a sitting Member of
Parliament. 49
One of the most striking developments noticeable pertaining to the differential
development among the Dalit communities across the country is that only the
communities which got influenced by the Ambedkarite movement and adopted
Ambedkarite ideology have shown substantial progress. In other words, we can largely
acknowledge that only pro-Ambedkarite communities have shown remarkable signs of
amelioration and uplift. Be it Mahars in Maharashtra, Malas in Andhra, the Chamars in
North India, Adi-Dravidas and Pariahs in Tamil Nadu, and the Dushads and Paswans in
16
Bihar, the consciousness of all these communities and their movements were influenced
by Ambedkar and his ideology. Incidentally, the rest of the anti-Ambedkarite groups of
communities that picked alternative leadership remained relatively backward.
The Context of Sub-Classification
The issue of reservations has always been controversial for the upper castes. Even since the
Constitution was adopted, there were a plethora of judgments both in favour of and against
reservations, starting from the Champakam Dorairajan case in 1951 which led to the first
ever amendment to the Constitution and insertion of article 15(4). But these were all driven
by the non-reserved categories. Now to further add to the complications, the issue of further
classifying reservation has also caught the imagination of the ruling classes.
The implementation of reservations for the Scheduled Castes for admission into
various educational institutions, for representation to various political institutions such as
Assembly and Parliament or appointments in various governmental organizations was never
seriously challenged. A shift was however emerging in Punjab, especially with regard to
Dalit political power in the 1960s and 1970s. Since the implementation of Constitution
making mandatory or obligatory ‘reservations’ for the Scheduled Castes, reservations were
based on the policy of ‘first come first served’ basis on merit and no preference was provided
on any ground within these Scheduled Castes for any appointment or admissions. During the
1960s the Dalits in Punjab who comprised more than30 percent of its total population, started
asserting and staging walkouts in unison, cutting across political lines against atrocities, and
demanding separate budget for Dalit uplift. The Congress government under the leadership
of Zail Singh, the then-Chief Minister, divided the Scheduled Caste list, sowing the seeds of
divisional politics. The 30 percent strong assertive Dalits were split into Ad-Dharmi-Ravidasi
group and Mazhabhi-Balmiki group. The inter-group animosities pushed them into virtual
political insignificance with no decisive say in the Punjab politics. In Punjab, the initiation of
Dalit division took place in 1975, and it needs to be reiterated that this was processed without
any deliberations or transparent procedures. It was a decision that the state government
planned and issued a notification in order to divide Dalits.50
17
Haryana state partly carved out of Punjab, adopted the policies initiated by the Punjab
government. It had another political dimension, though the rise and spread of influence of
Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) in Uttar Pradesh and adjacent regions was a cause of concern.
With the rise of BSP in Haryana, the Congress government under the leadership of Bhajan
Lal in 1994 revised the Scheduled Caste list of Haryana and introduced elements of internal
divisions.51 The 20 percent strong Dalit population that was reclassified have never had a
significant voice since then. That was because the groups led by dominant Chamar and
Balmiki castes were at loggerheads over the distribution of benefits.
What is discernible, in view of the mentioned examples, is that Congress has
certainly adopted the colonial policy of divide and rule. More than any ideological basis or
concern for the genuine welfare of the Dalits the modus operandi of the state governments
indubitably point to a more vulgar political praxis that arose out of anxiety about the potential
dangers of the Dalit unity. Larger political considerations were outweighed by short-term
political games that are routinely played unabashedly, as illustrated by the absence of any
transparent process of deliberations and consultations but by the redesigning of constitutional
provisions to the detriment of Dalit interests. For about three decades, since the decision to
divide Dalits had taken place, this issue was strikingly evaded by social scientists or
academia in terms of the political growth and implications of these divisions.52 Ironically,
sizeable populations of literate Dalits in these two states i.e., Punjab and Haryana, are also
unaware of the government’s policy of classification and division.
It is in this context that the case of Andhra Pradesh is not only important but quite
interesting in several ways. The Karamchedu massacre53 of 1985 led to the organization of
Dalits into a movement led by the Dalit Mahasabha.54 After the Tsundur incident of 1991, it
further strengthened and consolidated as a strong force.55 What is worth noting here is that
the Dalit Mahasabha leadership was drawn from the organic intellectuals who were not
associated with any established political camp and can be considered the most progressive
one after the Maharashtra awakening in the post-colonial era.56 It had created ground-level
leadership that was all set to move into the political arena. In 1994, after the BSP victory in
the UP elections of 1993, a rally was organized at Hyderabad. This victory rally of BSP
18
supporters in Andhra Pradesh forced the ruling TDP leader N.T. Rama Rao to shake hands
with Kanshi Ram. Dalit intellectuals saw the great possibility of such an alliance in Andhra
Pradesh that could have changed the face of national politics. This possibility, however,
dissipated.57
Like most caste-based coalitions that failed to crystallize in the nation’s
electoral history, the coalition of Dalits of Andhra Pradesh under Kanshi Ram’s Bahujan
Samaj Party (BSP) with N.T. Rama Rao’s Telugu Desam Party (TDP) did not happen
despite NTR’s offer to share 40 out of 294 seats in the 1994 Assembly elections. The deal
was brokered by Devendra Goud58 and a Dalit Journalist.59 This pre-poll arrangement could
not materialize, as in 1994 Kanshi Ram frittered it all away to focus only on Uttar Pradesh,
leaving Andhra Pradesh in a huff. Yet, this abortive attempt at a coalition led to the next
phase of Dalit politics. The result of this “victory rally” of BSP in Hyderabad60 which
witnessed lakhs of Dalits coming together under one “united” front was to shock the then
government and political parties. This forced them to pilot another political experiment of
“divisions”. Dramatically, on 27th July 1994 at Edumudu village, Prakasam district,
incidentally in the same district where a Dalit massacre gave birth to Dalit Mahasabha, a new
organization known as Madiga Reservation Porata Samiti (MRPS) emerged.
One of the causes attributed for the origin of the organization was the seething
discontent among the Madigas over their relatively backward status. The Madigas
complained that the Malas were gaining benefits of reservation disproportionate to their
population. As a result, they initiated a movement popularly known as ‘Madiga Dandora’
movement to fight for justice.61 The striking thing that the Madigas did was to proclaim their
distinct identity and demand a separate identity from the rest of the Dalit community. They
added prefixes to their activities and programmes, like for instance “Madiga Dandora Rally”,
“Madiga Dandora Meeting” etc. Consequently, the MRPS leadership explicitly formulated a
political agenda with a demand for a reasonable share in the Scheduled Caste reservation,
and vociferously argued for it in organized meetings, rallies, and padayatras.62 With
vigorous efforts of popular mobilization and with staunch support of the then ruling party
TDP, they brought considerable pressure on the government to accept their demands. This
led to an announcement by the then-Chief Minister in the State Assembly of an appointment
of a Commission to look into the matter.63
19
What is intriguing here is the manner in which the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh
appointed a Commission, issued directions to it, and laid down guidelines regarding what
was to follow. In other words, it was not the case of a regular procedure where a
Commission, after its enquiry, investigation and examination of the issue decides to classify
Dalits into certain categories. On the contrary, the Commission simply facilitated the political
designs or directions of the then-government. The statement made by the Chief Minister on
the floor of the Assembly on 2nd September 1996 is worth mentioning.64 He noted that
“there have been persistent demands from a certain section of persons belonging to
Scheduled Castes that disproportionately large number of benefits have gone to a
particular Sub-Caste among Scheduled Castes and thereby demanding for categorization
of Sub-Caste among Scheduled Castes into A, B, C, and D.” Following by this statement
by the Chief Minister, a one-man Commission of Enquiry was constituted, headed by
Justice P. Ramachandra Raju to ascertain whether disproportionately large number of
benefits had gone to any group among Scheduled Castes of the State, and if so, to
recommend the steps required for equitable distribution of benefits. The Commission, in
its report of May 1997, placed its findings that there was disproportionate distribution of
reservation benefits in as much as the “Mala” and “Adi-Andhra” among Scheduled Caste
communities were over-represented both in public employment and in educational
institutions. The Commission also recommended that SC communities of the State should
be categorized into four groups i.e., A, B, C, and D, which indicates that the Commission
simply followed the instructions of the Chief Minister.
What is interesting here is that the appointment of the Commission was done in a
record time of eight days. That means the entire process from making an announcement /
statement by the Chief Minister, consultation and formal appointment were all
accomplished in a record time of eight days! If the government showed its swiftness in
appointment of the Commission, the latter itself took eight months to submit its report to
the government on 28th May 1997.65 Surprisingly, the appointment of the Cabinet subcommittee (2nd June 1997) over the report of Justice Ramachandra Raju Commission gave
a green signal to the Commission’s recommendations in a day i.e., 2nd June 1997.
Consequently, a Government Order (GO) to implement the recommendations was ready
20
in five days’ time. In September 1997, in response to several writ petitions challenging
categorisation, a full bench of the High Court quashed the GO as ultra virus. This action
was a result of the fact that the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) was
not consulted in the matter by the State Government.66 In turn the Andhra Pradesh
government filed an appeal before the Supreme Court on October 13 and simultaneously
approached the NCSC for availing its concurrence to the GO. In accordance with the
Commission’s advice, the Government withdrew the petition before the Supreme Court on
January 4, 1998.
The National Commission for Scheduled Castes, responding to the AP government
to a reference received in the year 1998 regarding sub-classification of Scheduled Castes,
observed that the findings of the Raju Commission were based on limited and inadequate
data and no scientific method had been adopted to ascertain a holistic picture of the
varying levels of development of different SC communities. Thus, it stated that any orders
based on such findings and recommendations could not be treated as rational. However, in
spite of these observations, the government of Andhra Pradesh, accepted the Raju
Commission’s recommendations and promulgated an ordinance in June, 1997, subclassifying all the 59 SC communities in the State into four groups (A, B, C, and D) based
on relative backwardness, and fixing separate quota in reservation in services of the State
and seats in their educational institutions for each of the four groups. Consequently, this
Ordinance was challenged in the Andhra Pradesh High Court.
In the meanwhile, i.e., during its pendency, the State Government replaced the
ordinance with the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes (Rationalisation of Reservation)
Act, 2000, also known as A.P. Act of 2000, in May 2000).67 The validity of the said Act,
though challenged, was upheld by the High Court in its judgment in November 2000. An
appeal against this order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court was filed in the Supreme
Court (E.V. Chinnaiah vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others), challenging the validity
of the aforesaid A.P. Act of 2000. A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court struck down
the Act by a unanimous judgment on 05 November 2004,68 mainly on grounds that the
sub-categorization of Scheduled Castes is not provided in the scheme of Constitution as
21
well as in Article 341 (1); Scheduled Castes form a class by themselves, but the State Act
purported to divide Scheduled Castes into four groups and also divide 15 percent
reservation quota allotted to them. The apex court also said that it was beyond the power
of the State to sub-classify a class already recognized by the Constitution and allot a
portion of the already reserved quota amongst the State-created sub-classes within the lists
of Scheduled Castes. The apex Court also mentioned that “for re-grouping of Scheduled
Castes, the State cannot rely upon the Articles 15(4) and 16(4), nor on entry 41 of List II
and Entry 25 of List III of the VII Scheduled. The State Act was beyond the legislative
competence of the State and also violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, said the apex
court in its ruling. Hence all the three states, Punjab, Haryana and Andhra Pradesh have
withdrawn their respective orders of sub-categorisation.69
After the Supreme Court judgement, the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly
unanimously adopted the following resolution on 10th December 2004 and invoked the
Parliament to consider its recommendations:
“This House had passed Resolution on 22nd April, 1998, for categorization
of Scheduled Castes as recommended by Justice Ramachandra Raju
Commission. In view of the recent Supreme Court Judgement, the House
resolves to recommend to the Government of India to take up the matter in
Parliament”.
The ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment examined this matter and sought
the views of the Ministry of Law and Justice on 28th March 2005. As a result the Law and
Justice Ministry obtained the opinion of the Attorney General for India (hereafter referred
as AGI) in the light of the Supreme Court’s judgement in the E.V.Chinnaiah vs. State of
Andhra Pradesh and other cases. The AGI felt that the present case was similar to one
where Article 16(4A) was inserted by the Constitution in its 77th Amendment Act of 1995,
consequent upon the decision in the Indra Sawheney’s case, which had held that
reservation in promotion would violate Article 14 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court
in the present case struck down sub-classification of Scheduled Castes on the ground that
Article 14 of the Constitution does not permit such sub-classification in what is otherwise
22
understood as a ‘homogenous’ group of Scheduled Castes, at least on ground that all these
constituted an “untouchable” community.
In the light of Attorney General of India’s opinion, the Ministry of Social Justice
and Empowerment prepared a note for the Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs
(hereafter read as CCPA), dated 16th January 2006, seeking consideration and decision in
this regard for further course of action from the following options: a) the aforesaid
judgement of the Supreme Court is deemed as the final legal position and no further steps
be initiated towards neutralizing its effect; b) in view of the unanimous resolution passed
by the Andhra Pradesh Assembly, suitable law may be enacted by the government of
Andhra Pradesh and proposal may be made to the Central government for placing the Act
in the Ninth Scheduled of the Constitution; and c) in view of the opinion of the Attorney
General for India, the government of Andhra Pradesh may be advised to commission
research studies to indicate a necessity for such a sub-classification and to generate
unimpeachable evidence that some groups among Scheduled Caste have received
proportionately larger benefits and further action would be taken on the basis of the
research study.70
The CCPA in its decision dated 9th March 2006 decided that a retired Judge of the
Supreme Court be appointed to examine the matter in all its aspects. The Ministry of
Social Justice and Empowerment prepared a note for the Union Cabinet dated 28 August
2006, and sought approval to set up a Commission namely, “National Commission to
examine the issue of Sub-Categorization of Scheduled Castes”. The Commission’s
proposed terms of reference included the examination of the Constitutional Statutory and
legal ramifications of the demand for sub-classification of Scheduled Castes in other
States / Union Territories. The Union Cabinet in its meeting held on 7th September 2008,
approved the proposal along with a modification i.e. to delete “examination” of said issues
in regard to other States / Union Territories. Accordingly a resolution dated 15th
November 2006 for constituting such a Commission was notified.
A panel of eight judges has been prepared by the Department of Justice following
the decision of the Union Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs (CCPA) to appoint a
23
retired Supreme Court Judge to examine the issue which has arisen out of the Supreme
Court Judgement.71 The National Commission for Scheduled Castes (hereafter read as
NCSC) met the President of India and demanded that if the Centre consider constituting a
Commission, then a retired Supreme Court Judge belonging to the Scheduled Castes be
appointed. The President sought the opinion of the Union Ministry of Social Justice and
Empowerment in view of the demands of the NCSC. The Ministry informed the President
that it had asked the Department of Justice to provide the names of those Judges who had
demitted office in the past two years. The Justice Department furnished a list of eight
retired judges and also conveyed to the Ministry Social Justice and Empowerment that it
did not keep a caste-wise list of Judges. While opposing the demand of the NCSC for the
appointment of a Scheduled Caste Judge to examine the issue of the sub-classification of
the Scheduled Castes, the Haryana Scheduled Castes (Block-A) Forum said that only a
non-Scheduled Caste retired Judge of the Supreme Court be entrusted the responsibility of
looking into the entire gambit of the reservation policy.72
However, as the process of appointment and joining of the Chairperson in the
Commission showed no progress, the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment in its
note to the Union Cabinet dated 16th May 2007, sought expansion in the scope of its
Resolution dated 15th November 2006, to include retired Chief Justice of India, Chief
Justice of High Court, retired Judge of Supreme/High Court or any other person of
eminence with understanding of the subject for appointment as the Chairperson in the
Commission. The Government of India, through its vide Gazette Notification
(Extraordinary) No. 257 published on 16th November 2006, constituted the “National
Commission” to look into sub-classification issue. The Union Cabinet, in its meeting held
on 17th May 2007, approved this proposal. Soon after this, a retired Judge of the Delhi
High Court, Justice Usha Mehra, was appointed as Chairperson of the Commission on 19th
May 2007, for one year from the date of taking over charge. Reportedly the High Court
Judge was chosen for the Commission only after two former Supreme Court Chief
Justices and one former Supreme Court Judge had declined the request of the
government.73 The Commission technically known as the “National Commission to
examine the issue of Sub-Categorization of Scheduled Castes in Andhra Pradesh”
24
(hereafter referred as NCSCSC), headed by Justice Usha Mehra, held its first meeting with
Smt. Meira Kumar, Hon’ble Minister of Social Justice and Empowerment on 21st May
2007, which was attended by the Secretary, Additional Secretary and officers of the
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, with the following terms of reference:

To examine the various facets of the demand for sub-categorization of
Scheduled Castes in Andhra Pradesh subsequent to the judgment of the
Supreme Court of India in the case of E.V. Chinnaiah Vs. State of
Andhra Pradesh & others (2004(9) scale);

To examine the Constitutional, statutory, and legal ramifications of the
demand for sub-categorization of Scheduled Castes; and

To make recommendations on the future course of action, clearly
specifying the grounds and the criteria on which these
recommendations are based.
The Commission submitted its report on 1st May 2008, just 20 days before the end of
its tenure.74
As per the Commission’s recommendations, a proposal for amendment of
Article 341 of the Constitution of India, and additions of clause (3) thereto was suggested:
Parliament may by law provide for sub-categorization or de-sub
categorization of caste, race or tribe or part of or group within any caste,
race or tribe specified in a notification issued under clause (1) or by law
made by Parliament under clause (2), upon receiving a resolution from
legislature of a State / U.T passed unanimously.
The NCSCSC recommended that to provide effective representations or subclassification to the various castes etc. specified as Scheduled Castes in relation to a
State/UT under Article 341, the Constitution may be amended. This would be on the basis
of recommendations made by the Legislature of a State by way of a unanimous resolution
to the effect as to what percentage of reservation should be given to various Scheduled
Castes, for the purpose of reservation in the service of the States as well as in educational
institutions. Further, the amendment would provide that the State Legislature shall make
such recommendations on the basis of the data collected by it through a Judicial
Commission to be headed, at least, by a sitting or retired High Court Judge.
25
What needs to be noted is that the report of the Commission is incomplete, as it did
not address the second term of reference i.e.: the Constitutional, statutory and legal
ramifications of the demand for sub-classification of Scheduled Castes. In fact the report
seems to be merely an extension of Ramachandra Raju Commission barring the formers
procedural tactics i.e. visits of the Commission to 11 District, and a commissioned study
of the Indian Institute of Economics, Hyderabad.75 As mentioned above, the Usha Mehra
Commission largely provided a base for its own recommendations despite having been
rejected by the Supreme Court of India. While the technique deployed to ascertain a
rational basis was limited i.e. only eleven districts were covered, it practically visited Dalit
habitations in only in three districts. i.e. Warangal, Medak and Ranga Reddy Districts.76
Similarly, the Indian Institute of Economics, to whom the Commission entrusted a
study, focused on select 36 communities excluding 24 communities out of its purview.
The Commission report was limited despite its professed commitment to provide a holistic
picture, both in terms of its regional focus and its discrete communities. The profile of
Scheduled Castes, in Chapter-II of the report, is uncritically based on three decades-old
data. The profile of the communities is also silent about several crucial indicators like
literacy rate, educational attainments, work participation rates, etc, in absence of which, a
comparison among the communities is flawed. The fundamental issue however, remains
to be logically explained; i.e. while Constitution does not provide for sub-classification of
Scheduled Castes, the National Commission for Scheduled Castes rejected the issue on
two occasions, and if sub-classification would create administrative problems, how could
a retired High Court Judge examine the decision of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme
Court, which declared the Scheduled Castes as a homogenous class?
Similarly, there is deviation between what the NCSCSC intended to recommend
and what it has actually recommended. The scope of the Commission was to look into the
issue of disproportion, if any, amongst the Dalits with regard to reservation in education
institutions and services under the State. On the contrary, the proposed recommendation
encompasses the entire reservation policy itself, i.e. reservation in services, reservation in
educational institutions, and reservation in bodies like Panchayati Raj Institutions etc.
26
The NCSCSC, in its report, has stated that Scheduled Castes are a heterogeneous
group. This averment of the Commission is not legally tenable as the Supreme Court
through a judgment,77 has reiterated that Scheduled Castes are not an amalgam of Castes;
rather “they are a class apart having the common features of socio, economic and
educational backwardness arising out of the traditional practice of untouchability”. Further
reservation in services is given to those communities which are not adequately represented
in the services of the State. The National Commission in examining the issue of subclassification of Scheduled Castes in Andhra Pradesh, has not indicated anywhere in the
report that any of the communities listed as Scheduled Castes in the State of Andhra
Pradesh has become forward on account of their adequate representation in the services of
the State and they are no longer socially, educationally and economically backward. If all
the communities which have been notified as Scheduled Castes in Andhra Pradesh are not
adequately represented in the services and are socially, economically and educationally
backward, then there is no rationale for debarring any community for consideration of
their claim for reservation by sub-classification.
The Supreme Court, in E.V. Chinnaiah’s case, held that sub-classification of
Scheduled Castes is violation of Article 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution. It is also not
permissible under the doctrine of reasonable classification. The Usha Mehra Commission
has not clarified or responded to this objection of Supreme Court on sub classification but
rather has depended more on the lines of defense counsel arguments.
Justice Usha Mehra Commission has also heavily relied on the Report of Advisory
Committee78 on the revision of the list of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, 1965
(popularly known as Lokur Committee), without realizing the fact that the
recommendations and findings of the Committee were superficial and thus not considered
worthy of practical use. A perusal of the report reveals that the Commission did not
examine the issues by critically adhering to appropriate method. One of the incredible
aspects is that the Commission incorporated data from various sources irrespective of the
fact whether it was relevant to the issue per se. For example, a list of studies sponsored by
the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment in Andhra Pradesh during the years 2001
27
to 2004 is attached in the Chapter-VI of the report. A further examination reveals that in
no way is the above-mentioned material connected with the issue under examination. One
can discern several such superfluous additions, like views of Dr. Ambedkar on caste
system and on insertion of word ‘backward’ in clause 4 of Article 16, extracts from the
Supreme Court decisions in the case of State of Kerala v/s. N.M. Thomas, Marri Chandra
Shekhar Rao v/s. Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College, Soosai v/s have been reproduced
despite their irrelevance to the issue under investigation.
The NCSCSC in support of its recommendation has stated that under article 16(4)
Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and Other Backward Classes have been placed
together. In the Mandal case the Supreme Court has held that classification of OBC
communities can be made. In this connection it is stated that it is a fact that for the
purpose of reservation in services the Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs)and
Other Backward Classes (OBCs) have been clubbed together under the term Backward
Classes but it is also a fact that Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward
Classes are three distinct groups having no affinity. The criteria for their specifications as
SCs, STs and OBCs are different. Therefore, what is applicable in case of Other Backward
Classes does not hold good for other categories.79
Further this argument of sub-
classification of OBCs was adduced by the State of Andhra Pradesh in the Supreme Court
in E.V. Chinnaiah’s case, which the Supreme Court rejected.
Consequently, the report of the NCSCSC was referred to the NCSC on 23rd May
2008, for obtaining its view. The National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC)
under the Chairmanship of Sardar Buta Singh stated in its letter dated 4th December 2008
to the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, that “the Article 16 (4) of the
Constitution of India is an enabling provision which enables the State to provide for
making of the reservation in appointments and if the State does so, it also decides its
proportion. The State Government of Andhra Pradesh may adopt provisions of afore-said
Article of the Constitution. The Government of Andhra Pradesh is advised that most
educationally and socially backward castes of Andhra Pradesh listed under the
28
Presidential Orders … may be given proportionate share in the reservation in the State of
Andhra Pradesh only.”
The opinion of National Commission for Scheduled Castes on the basis of such a
faulty report may not stand scrutiny because Article 16 (4) is an enabling article for the
Scheduled Castes and Tribes for provision of adequate representation in any class or
classes of services and posts under the state and which, in the opinion of the State are not
adequately represented. This is provision of fundamental right and the E.V. Chinniah case
has categorically adjudicated that any sub-classification of list of SCs is violation of
Article 16. As such the enabling Article 16 for providing reservations to SCs and STs
cannot be amended to classify SCs or STs. In the education sector a similar erroneous
suggestion would necessitate an amendment to Article 15(4) and (5). The implication on
ST list is also apparent in the opinion given by NCSC.
Though the NCSC has not explicitly specified, it would appear from its opinion that
it does not support the recommendation of the NCSCSC to amend Article 341 of the
Constitution. Also, its above opinion does not seem to take into account the Supreme
Court Judgment in the E.V. Chinnaiah case. Article 341 merely identifies the procedure to
add or delete castes and no provision or no such provision can be made under the letter
and spirit of the Constitution. Article 341 is not amenable to such provision of sub
classification and Parliament cannot abdicate the powers to States to tamper with SC lists
which are basically pre-grounded on political considerations. It was precisely on this point
that Dr. B.R. Ambedkar argued for Article 341 as a special case and opined on the same
lines in the Constituent assembly. The opinion of the NCSC will have adverse irrevocable
implications as regards constitutional provisions in Article 15 (4&5), Article 16 (4) and
Article 341, which will not sustain the scrutiny of Supreme Court.
The question for consideration is whether suggestions, if made by this Commission
for reorganization, redistribution or apportionment of benefits amongst various Scheduled
Castes, would be tantamount to contempt. The Parliament, as said by Apex Court in
Chinnaiah’s case, is fully competent to legislate and make a law for the benefit of all those
29
Scheduled Castes which are not adequately represented or are still socially backward and
discriminated against.
Commissions for Sub-Classification in Other States
As mentioned earlier, the Government of Punjab initiated the policy of sub-classification
of the Scheduled Castes through an executive order in 1975. It was consequently followed
by Government of Haryana in 1994.80 It is mentioned in the executive order81 that the
“government has decided that henceforth, fifty percent of vacancies of the quota reserved
for Scheduled castes would be offered to Balmikis and Mazbhi Sinks, if available, as first
preference from amongst the Scheduled Caste candidates, in direct recruitment only and
not in promotion cases. It has also been decided that promotion cases already decided in
the light of aforesaid instructions are not to be opened”.
In 1994, the government of Haryana made an unprecedented move of revising the
existing policy of reservation for Scheduled Castes in direct recruitment to Government
services. It stated that:82
For the purpose of reservation in services, the scheduled castes in Haryana
will be put in two categories i.e. Block ‘A’ and Block ‘B’. Block ‘B’ will
consist of Chamars, Jatia Chamars, Rahgars, Ramdasias or Ravidasias.
Block ‘A’ will consist of the remaining 36 scheduled castes including
Balmiki, Dhanak, Nat etc.
Within the quota reserved for scheduled castes in direct recruitment to
Govt. jobs 50% vacancies will be offered to candidates from Block ‘A’. In
case suitable candidates from Block ‘A’ are not available, candidate from
Block ‘B’ may be recruited against these vacancies.
Similarly, candidates from Block ‘B’ will be given preference in respect of
the remaining 50% vacancies. In case suitable candidates from Block ‘B’
are not available, candidates from Block ‘A’ may be recruited against these
vacancies.
The inter seniority of the candidates from Block ‘A’ and Block ‘B’ will be
as per the common merit list prepared by the recruiting agency. It will not
be necessary to fix the roster points separately for each of the Blocks
within the present roster system.
30
If on a particular occasion the total number of vacancies meant for
Scheduled castes is odd, say 9. Five of them will go to Block ‘A’ and 4 to
Block ‘B’. On the next such occasion, however, the position would ..., that
is 4 of them will go to Block ‘A’ and 5 to Block ‘B’
In 2001 Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Rajnath Singh used his political tactic to
maneuver fortunes in the state and to settle scores with his political rivals and their vote
banks, i.e. Mulayam Singh Yadav of Samajwadi Party (SP) and Mayawati of Bahujan
Samaj Party (BSP), and initiated the process of sub-classification. Rajnath Singh
announced his decision on June 28th to give policy of “quota within Quota” to the Dalits
and the most backward castes among both the Other Backward Classes (OBCs). To
formulate this into a provision, he constituted the Social Justice Committee, headed by
Hukum Singh,83 and co-chaired by Ramapati Shastri.84
The terms of reference of the committee included an overview of the programmes,
facilities and systems available for the benefit of the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes
and Backward Classes, suggested changes in reservation according to the State’s
population after the creation of a separate province of Uttaranchal State, looked at the
status of recruitment against the quota available for these categories, estimated
representation of different castes under the reservation benefits already granted, and
suggested measures to improve the lot of these categories, especially sections that had
been deprived of benefits so far.85
The Commission constituted on June 28, 2001,
completed its work in a record period of two months. The Commission, which was
entrusted with the task of carrying out a caste-based census in the State in order to decide
the quantum of reservation for the most backward sections among the Other Backward
Classes (OBCs) and Dalits, submitted its report on August 31, 2001.
The Commission proposed classification of Dalits, as preconceived, into two
schedules: Schedule A comprising Chamars, Jatavs and Dhusias, and Schedule B
comprising 65 other castes in the Scheduled Caste category. Of the 21 percent reservation
available for Dalits, the committee recommended the reservation of 10 percent for the
castes in Schedule A and 11 per cent for those in Schedule B. The castes in Schedule A
31
constitute the traditional support base of the BSP. It was alleged that although they
constitute only about 50 percent of the Dalit population in the State, they were unfairly
enjoying almost 80 percent of the benefits of reservation owing to their relatively well-off
status and the patronage of leaders such as Mayawati. Since these communities have in
general never voted for the BJP, the party is not likely to be affected by their resentment
against the committee's report.86
It was further observed that major share of benefits of reservations for Scheduled
Castes in the State had gone to the Jatavs, Chamars and the Pasis while castes like the
Valmikis, the Dhobis, and the Khatiks have not benefited. Both the Pasis and the Jatavs
were noted to be politically more influential and monetarily more prosperous than the
other castes among Dalits. Besides, owing to the political patronage of leaders like
Mayawati, who belongs to the Jatav caste and Ram Vilas Paswan, a Pasi, these castes had
emerged as more assertive than the rest.
Rajnath Singh made no secret of his hope to gain political benefits from the report
and the newly designed reservation policy. He unabashedly claimed: “I would not be
surprised if we crossed the 200-mark”,87 in the next state Assembly elections. In raking up
the issue of 'quota within quota', Rajnath Singh not only depended on the earlier formed
Commission/Committee reports, but also drew parallels to provisions for classification
models followed in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Bihar.
Similarly, following the suit was Karnataka where the State Government appointed
a judicial inquiry committee, to study the imbalances among different communities in
utilizing reservation facilities among different communities in the Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribe, under the chairmanship of Justice Sadashiva Judicial Inquiry
Commission.88 Its broad parameters were specified by Justice Sadashiva and no new
communities were to be included in the Scheduled Castes list as claimed by different Dalit
organizations. He stated that after the reorganization of the State in 1956, the communities
which were in the Scheduled Castes list in the regions which were merged with the then
Mysore state were included in the Scheduled Caste list. The Government had set a
deadline of September 27, 2007 for the commission to submit its report. However, the
32
later developments remain ambiguous. The Commission held its sitting and recorded the
pleas of different communities in 17 of the 27 districts, and was scheduled to complete the
public hearing in the remaining ten districts before the end of February 2007.
In Bihar, the Nitish Kumar government set up a commission known as “Maha
Dalit Commission” to suggest ways for the uplift of the most deprived communities from
amongst the Scheduled Castes. The commission was set up in August 2007 and was
headed by Viswanath Rishi89 with K.P. Ramaiah90 as its Secretary, along with three other
members.91 The Commission submitted its 186 page report comprising 116
recommendations report in November 2007, to improve the condition of what it termed as
‘Maha Dalits’.
Of the 22 Scheduled Castes of Bihar, the commission identified 18 castes as Maha
Dalits i.e., Dalits among the Dalits, seeking special measures to uplift them through a
series of affirmative action initiatives by the State government. The castes deemed to be in
need of special attention included Musahar, Bhuiyan, Mehtar, Dom, Rajwar, Nat and
Halal Khor sub-castes. The list excluded the ‘dominant’ castes like the Paswan, Dhobi,
Chamar and Pasi communities from the most deprived group.92 It is no coincidence that
all these four excluded sub-castes from the Nitish Kumar agenda of ‘Maha Dalits’ are
known to have political affiliations, and also serve his ulterior political motifs.93
The commission at certain point reckoned that the formation of this block and the
subsequent implementation of its recommendations would trigger “awareness among the
Maha Dalits”. Its Chairman Vishwanath Rishi, however, acknowledged that “this could
even have political repercussions”, but hastened to add that “the commission has been set
up with no political reasons.” However, Rishi claimed that the Commission was genuinely
concerned with empowerment of Maha Dalits who were in a pathetic condition.
Substantiating his claim, he pointed out that “none of the members of these communities
had made it to the civil services or any medical and engineering examinations. Their
representation in Panchayats is almost nothing. Let alone doctors and engineers, there are
no high school teachers from these communities. These communities need special help to
climb up the ladders of social and economic pyramid”. As regards its political dimensions,
33
he admitted that the constitution of the Maha Dalit Commission and its subsequent
developments would enlighten the Maha Dalits, and “they may begin taking political
decisions independent of the Dalits”.94 Strangely, a novel recommendation, unprecedented
in electoral history of caste politics, was a provision for special polling stations for Maha
Dalits, since it was assumed that it was very difficult for them to go to the main polling
stations and exercise their franchise freely. A grain bank scheme was recommended to
provide grain on loan, boiled rice instead of wheat be supplied under rural developmental
schemes, bank financing on priority basis, special loan mela by banks, schools be opened
in their areas with free books, scholarship, uniform, food and teachers possibly belonging
to Maha Dalit castes.95
Tamil Nadu was the latest to join the league to appoint a commission under the
chairmanship of Justice M.S. Janardhanam, a retired judge of the Madras High Court, on
March 25, 2008, to study the modalities of providing reservation for Arundathiyars within
the existing quota for Scheduled Castes.96 The Commission submitted its report on
November 22nd 2008, in about eight month’s time, again betraying a sign of urgency. The
commission professed that it “had gone to all aspects of the issue” in detail and
recommended that the Arundathiyar community needed to be empowered, as they were
backward in many spheres. The Arundathiyars included the sub-sects of Chakkiliar,
Madhari, Adi-Andhrar, Pagadai, Madia and Thotti. Although Jayalalitha, the former chief
minister and AIADMK leader called it a “political fraud”, M. Karunanidhi, claimed that
his government followed a practice adopted by the Punjab government.97 In an all-party
meeting, convened on 28 November, the Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi announced that
the State Cabinet had “accepted in principle” the report. In effect this meant a separate 3
per cent reservation for Arunthathiyar and a few other sub-sects within the existing quota
(18 percent) for the Scheduled Castes.98 As of now, perhaps this is the best possible option
to address the sub-classification issue. It was implemented in 2009 and is working well
although there was a writ petition to review or to repeal the said classification.
34
Historical Wonder and a Historical Blunder
When looking at the political developments with regard to the sub-classification issue, in
the sixty eight years of Independent India’s history of Legislative Assemblies, one just
wonders about the electronic speed with which the issue was resolved. One of the
incredible aspects in the re-visioning of reservation policy and the formulations of
provisions of sub-classification was the urgency with which the States acted across
political differences. It would not be incorrect to state that perhaps for the first time in the
60 years of Independent Indian history, if all the political parties i.e., communal, secular,
right, left and centrist parties came together unanimously on any single issue it was
indubitably with regard to the issue of sub-classification. This was dramatically upheld not
once or twice, but thrice in the Legislative Assembly of Andhra Pradesh. The Andhra
Pradesh Legislative Assembly successively passed thrice, historical and unanimous
resolutions supporting classification of Scheduled Caste reservations into ABCD. In other
words, the issue of classification or dividing Dalits was considered of fundamental
significance by all the political parties, more important than any other issues of national
importance like calamities, corruption, communalism, human rights violation, atrocities
on Dalits, Babri-Maszid, Mandal commission, reservation in private sector, extremism,
minorities or even national security issues like border conflicts. None of them, like in the
case of Dalit classification, was treated morally or politically crucial to garner consensus
across political parties.
The unique manner, in which this issue was formulated and the procedural
operandis illustrates the working of the state in this regard. First, the Andhra Pradesh
Legislative Assembly on 22nd April 1998 passed the resolution unanimously on need to
classify the Scheduled Castes reservations into A, B, C and D as recommended by Justice
Ramachandra Raju Commission. Secondly, the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly
unanimously passed the Scheduled Caste Reservation (Rationalisation) Act 20 of 2000 on
1st April 2000. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, in the light of the Supreme Court
Judgement of November 2004, the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly passed a
unanimous resolution on 10th December 2004 recommending to the Government of India
35
to take up the matter in the Parliament for enabling Scheduled Caste classification,
resulting in the appointment of the Usha Mehra Commission.
It is clearly evident that neither the government nor the commission, or
commissioned institutes to study the sub-classification issue or judicial commissions ever
reflected on the specific reasons for the emergence of generic identities on which the
provisions were formulated. For instance, the caste known as “Adi-Andhra” seems to be
an example in the Andhra case. The Adi-Andhra is a generic term and the sub caste is
basically offshoots of the Malas and Madigas.99 They are the descendents of the educated
and conscious ‘untouchables’ of early decades of twentieth century. Influenced by the
non-Aryan themes of Dravidian movement they identified themselves as “Adi-Andhras”,
claiming to be the original inhabitants of the land, based on the theory of “sons of the
soil”.100
The 1921 Census indicates this emergence of a conscious political category, for
there was no distinct sub-caste of Adi-Andhra in official enumerations. Significantly in
the 1931 census, they emerged with a remarkable strength of 665,000 under Adi-Andhra
category (see Table mentioned below). Though the term “Adi-Andhra” was popularized
from 1917, it was only in 1922 that the Madras government accepted the requisition of the
Dalits to delete all the earlier terms such as ‘panchama’, ‘pariah’ etc.,
from the
government records, and replace them along with “Adi” prefix based regional identity and
put them as “Adi-Andhra” or “Adi-Dravida”.101
The Legislative Council of the
th
government of Madras in its meeting held on 20 January 1922, passed a resolution that
“the Council recommends to the Government that the terms ‘Panchama’ or ‘Paraya’ used
to designate the ancient Dravidian community in Southern India should be deleted from
Government records, etc., and the term ‘Adi-dravida’ in the Tamil and ‘Adi-andhra’ in the
Telugu districts be substituted instead”.102 The government of Madras also gave an
undertaking that “the Government would have no objection to call the members of this
community…‘Adi-Andhra in Telugu districts if they prefer to be called so” and the
government accepted inability “to re-edit the old records”. What has been lost in the
discontent and conflict in this post-classifications political scenario is the historical
36
blunder committed by state governments in concurrence with its established commissions
and selected commissioned studies.
Population of Selected ‘Untouchable’ Castes in Madras Presidency 1921-1931103
(in thousands)
Caste
1921
1931
Cheruman
Holeya
Madiga
Mala
Parayan
Thoti
Adi-Andhra
Adi-Dravida
Adi-Karnataka
248
92
737
1,493
2,387
154
50
-
215
50
612
838
1,117
2
665
1,619
1
Justice Ramachandra Raju Commission, the state government, or Justice Usha
Mehra Commission, or even the Indian Institute of Economics, Hyderabad, which got the
assignment to study “the extent of benefits accrued to all the Scheduled Caste
Communities included in the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order 1950 in Andhra
Pradesh” have left unexplained the history of such an important generic identity,
encouraging misconceptions and prejudices based on fallacious notions. One could easily
notice that when all the other communities witnessed a decline in numbers between 1921
and 1931, only specific communities or sub-castes’ population indicated a remarkable
increase, deviating from the general trend. Clearly this was a result of emergence of a new
community or sub-caste. This was a considerable force at least in Adi-Andhra case, and it
was recorded as comprising a population of 665,000.104 The new category of Adi-Andhra
illustrates the flux that resulted from political development, wherein groups of Malas and
Madigas embraced a new identity. This, unlike the authentic empirical caste or sub-caste
category, was an identity formation that was misconceived as a separate caste by colonial
enumerators. This emergence of a distinct category consequently figures in the Scheduled
Caste list and has since continued to be treated as an exclusive sub-caste during the post
37
colonial period,105 despite its erroneous conceptions, both by the state and the
commissions. The contemporary Dalit politics is entangled in a conflict around
categorizations without recognition of its distinct nature. Given the self-conscious
assertion as early as 1920s, it is certain that they emerged as a relatively more developed
group than any other group among the Scheduled Castes in the state. This generic identity
does not necessarily suggest the validity of recognizing them as a separate sub-caste or
jati. It is incredible that the government-sponsored or appointed Commissions or
commissioned institutes have failed to recognize this colonial legacy and repeated this
historical blunder to gain legitimacy or consensus to their argument. The suspicion of one
caste that attributes its backwardness to the other Dalit castes is thus misplaced, leading to
a great deal of ambiguity and prejudices that have an adverse impact with great
repercussions in the future on the ideology of emancipation or emancipatory praxis.
Present Status of the Issue
When our Indian government or ministers act with remarkable promptness in resolving
the issue of classifications, for instance condoning eight decisions in less than seventeen
minutes,106 and pass an anti-reservation bill in the Rajya Sabha in less than two minutes107
it should not surprise us when they decide the future of the Dalits in just a minute. The
purpose for the proposed amendment is that once sub-classification of Scheduled Castes
of a State/UT is done by law, it would become permissible to equitably sub-allocate the
overall reservation quota for Scheduled Castes in (i) appointment to services in connection
with the affairs of that State/Union Territory and (ii) admission to educational institutions
run or substantially funded by that State/Union Territory, among the sub-categories of its
Scheduled Castes. However, the State/UT–specific sub-classification will not be
applicable in matters of appointments in Central services and in admission to Central
educational institutions. A provision to that effect also seems necessary in the proposed
amendment to the Constitution.
It has accordingly proposed to add two new clauses, (3) & (4), to Article 341 of
the Constitution – clause (3) on the lines suggested by the NCSCSC, and clause (4) to take
38
care of the aspect mentioned. Accordingly, the proposed text of the Constitutional
amendment is as follows:
341. Scheduled Castes
“(3) Parliament may, by law, provide for sub-categorization or de-subcategorization of the castes, races or tribes, or part of or group within any
castes, races or tribes specified in a notification issued under clause (1), or
by law made by Parliament under clause (2), in respect of a State or Union
Territory, upon receiving a resolution from the legislature of that State or,
as the case may be, Union Territory passed unanimously, recommending
such sub-categorization or, as the case may be, de-sub categorization.
(4)Upon the Scheduled Castes of a State/Union Territory being subcategorized as per clause (3) above, it shall, notwithstanding anything
contained in clauses (1) and (2) above, be lawful for such sub-categories to
be treated as a distinct entity for the purpose of reservation in the services
in connection with the affairs of that State or, as the case may be, Union
Territory, in pursuance of clause (4) of Article 16, and in admission to
educational institutions run or substantially aided by the Government of
that State or, as the case may be, Union Territory, in pursuance of clause
(5) of Article 15”
As a part of consequential procedural matters, once the above Constitutional
amendment is enacted, guidelines regarding procedure to be followed in this behalf would
be issued on the lines, mutatis mutandis, of the “approved modalities” for modification of
the list of Scheduled Castes. The gist of the above-mentioned “approved modalities” was
approved in 1999 by a Cabinet Committee on Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and
Minorities. The procedure at the Central level would include obtaining views and
considerations of the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and the Registrar
General of India. Also, the guidelines which would be issued to the States/Union
Territories, in this regard, would say, inter-alia, that the Legislature’s Resolution should
be obtained only after a detailed investigation about relative backwardness of various
Scheduled Castes of the State, by an independent Commission headed by a serving/retired
judge of a High Court, and that the conclusion of the Commission should be based on
“unimpeachable evidence” which would stand judicial scrutiny, as mentioned by the AGI.
39
It is learnt from reliable sources that the draft note for the Cabinet has been
prepared for inter-Ministerial consultation and circulated to the Ministries of Home
Affairs, Tribal Affairs, and Human Resource Development, and Departments of Personnel
& Training, and Legal Affairs. The Ministry of Tribal Affairs has been requested to obtain
the views of the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes also. Approval of the Cabinet
is solicited to introduce a Constitution Amendment Bill in Parliament for inserting two
new clauses (3) and (4) to Article 341 of the Constitution, with such modifications of a
drafting nature as the Ministry of Law & Justice may consider necessary. This Note has
been believed to be seen and approved by the Minister, Social Justice & Empowerment,
and received approval of the NCSC. One wonders why, when these two constitutional
bodies have no objections, should ministries not at all related to the issue or the related
bodies, have problems. Given the fact that the Social Justice Minister and the National
Commission for Scheduled Castes have already expressed their consent, no other ministry
will raise any voice against this issue in the Cabinet as this is not related to their concern,
and in no time it will be approved. As has been illustrated, in this context the
political/bureaucratic masters are efficient enough and would not require more than two
minutes to declare the Dalit future and for forever.
Given the process and political motives with regard to sub-classifications there is a
growing suspicion about the bonafide intentions of the State since their actions in respect
of sub-classification are further breaking the Dalits into splinter groups, thereby
dissipating their power. Then what are the alternatives to rationalize reservations or
rationalized distribution of reservations? One could take up the relative parameters of
‘development’ in the fields of educational or employment fields, and frame policies to
empower the most backward amongst these Scheduled Caste categories as in the case of
the model envisaged by the Tamil Nadu for instance. Dalits were a strong political force
(e.g. in Punjab in 1950s and 60s or in Andhra Pradesh in 1980s and early 90s) which
demonstrated their strength and commendable bargaining power, be it in terms of more
share in resources and demand for strict implementation of the existing provisions, share
in all developmental schemes as their representative share in all spheres, etc. However
divisions into sub-classes have destined Dalits to become a spent force, and to become
40
imprisoned, scattered, and defused blocks. That is foreshadowed in what we witness now
in Andhra politics where each block is divided into three to four groups and have become
an addendum, one each, to established political parties.
Given the polarization there are only two issues that can unite these sprinkled
Dalits, one being the issue of any act of vandalism against Ambedkar or Ambedkar’s
statue, and the other being raising their voice against the reservation. Even these issues
could not bring them together in the recent past, more particularly when the issue of
‘reservation bill 2008’ came. In Punjab when the political activists and intellectuals
proved their strength together in 1950s and 60s, they were divided. When Kanshi Ram
tried to bring all these scattered groups together, he was accused as being a Ravidasi. In
Haryana Dalits leaders divided as per their party loyalties, which further weakened their
strength. This was proved in the recent atrocities of Gohana. Andhra Pradesh proved to be
case that reached a stage that is beyond redemption now.
Concluding Remarks
Finally to sum up, in the so called sub-classification phenomenon the Dalits are in a sense
alienating themselves from a collective identity of pain, agony and trauma of centuries-old
subjugation and oppression. The frantic and haste method with which states have acted
(some extremely successfully, others abortive, while still others evolved novel models)
points to a new dangerous trend in caste politics. While the State has deftly deployed the
rhetoric of democratic redistribution or historic justice, it has resulted in inexplicable
mistrust, hatred, and shifting alliances, thus ensuring irreparable damage to Dalits in
general.
Dalits are systematically split and realigned in every state with the upper caste
parties vying to reap the results of this volatile division. Unfortunately, though the issue of
sub-classification has consumed a great amount of time of Dalit intellectuals and energy
of activists, they are still not able to grapple with the issue. As the growing shift towards
dilution of reservations per se among all the political parties, who are very slowly
reaching such a consensus, continues, the day is not too far when they will take up the
41
issue to end reservations itself. The issue of reservations in private sector has withered of
on its own quietly, and the manner in which the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
Reservation Bill 2008, that was passed in the Rajya Sabha with no discussion and debate
in less than three minutes, clearly demonstrates how the Dalit force has diluted as there
was no protest or voice against it. It should be recalled that Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, during his
lifetime, was disillusioned with the divisive tendencies within the Dalit movement. In one
such instance he expressed his anguish by saying: “with a great difficulty I have brought
the caravan where it is seen today. Let the caravan march on the further on, despite the
hurdles, pitfalls and difficulties that may come its way…if my people, my lieutenants are
not able to take the caravan ahead, they should leave it where it is seen today, but must
not, under any circumstances allow the caravan to go back”. It remains to be seen if the
Dalits will be capable of reflecting on this crucial moment of history and evolve
alternatives to carry forth its rich legacy as a new phase of politics unfolds, or whether
they will succumb to the delusionary tactics of the State.
* An earlier version of this paper was presented at a symposium on Most
Marginalised Dalits, held at GB Pant Social Science Institute, Allahabad on 29th
March 2016.Author contact:[email protected]
Suggested citation: Rao, Y.C. (2016), “Hermeneutics of Dalit Sub-Classification in India”,
CSDE Occasional Paper Series – 1/2016, JNU, New Delhi.
42
Notes and References
1
For details, see Y.Chinna Rao, “The ‘self’ and the ‘other’: Towards Dalit Identity” Human
Rights Global Focus, Vol. 3, No.1, (March, 2006), pp. 30-37.
2
In the modern period European visitors to India noted the existence of despised groups, and the
Tamil word Pariah caste lent its name to the English vocabulary as a synonym for an outcaste
from society. For them, Pariah means a person of low caste, or of no caste or socially outcaste.
See A.S. Hornby, Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary of Current English, (Delhi: 1985),
(8th impression), p.608.
3
See Molesworth’s Marathi English Dictionary, 1975, (Reprint of 1831 edition), cited in
Eleanor Zelliot, From Untouchable to Dalit: Essays on Ambedkar Movement, (New Delhi,
2005), (First Published in 1992).
4
Gangadhar Pantawane, “Evolving a New Identity: The Development of Dalit Culture”, in
Barbara R. Joshi (ed.) Untouchables! Voices of Dalit Liberation Movement, (New Delhi, 1986),
pp.79-87.
5
Indian Statutory Commission, Report, Vol. I, (Calcutta: 1930), p.37.
6
Fro details see Documents of Poona Pact, 4 November 1931.
7
Ibid.
8
For details see Census of India, 1931, Vol. I - India, Part I- Report, (Delhi: 1933)., by J.H.
Hutton, “Exterior Castes”, pp.471-501. In this volume Appendices were particularly
informative.
9
Ibid.
10
Ibid.
11
Census of India, 1921, Vol. I, Part - I, Paragraph 193.
12
Census of India, 1931, Volume I, Part I (Appendix I), p. 472.
13
For details see Indian Franchise Committee, 1932, Vol. I, (London, 1932).
14
The Government of India (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1936.
15
Subs. By the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, s.10, for “may, after consultation
with the Governor or Rajpramukh of a State”.
16
Ins. By the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956, s.29. and Sch.
17
The words and letters “specified in Part A or Part B of the First Schedule” omitted by s.29
and Sch., ibid.
43
18
The words “or Rajpramukh” omitted by s.29 and Sch., ibid.
19
See the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 (C.O. 19), the Constitution (Scheduled
Castes) (Union Territories) Order, 1951 (C.O. 32), the Constitution (Jammu and Kashmir)
Scheduled Castes Order, 1956 (C.O. 52), the Constitution (Dadra and Nagar Haveli)
Scheduled Castes Order, 1962 (C.O. 64), the Constitution (Pondicherry) Scheduled Castes
Order, 1964 (C.O. 68), the Constitution (Goa, Daman and Diu) Scheduled Caste Order, 1968
(C.O. 81) and the Constitution (Sikkim) Scheduled Castes Order, 1978 (C.O. 110).
20
Subs by the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956, s. 29. and Sch, for “any such
State”.
21
Constituent Assembly Debates, Volume-IX, Dated 17th September, 1949. [emphasis added].
22
Watan means service lands. Watan lands have been given to a person or family for his work
and shall always remain in his/her possession.
23
Neera Burra, “What Ambedkar Just a Leader of the Mahars?”, Economic and Political
Weekly, vol. 21, Nos. 10 &11, (March 8-15, 1986), pp. 429-431.
24
Dhananjay Keer, Dr. Ambedkar: Life and Mission, (Bombay,1954), p. 70.
25
Neera Burra, “What Ambedkar Just a Leader of the Mahars?”, op. cit., p. 429.
26
The Times of India, 15th August, 1931. Also see B.G. Kunte, (Compiler), Source Material on
Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar and the Movement of Untouchables, Vol. I, (Bombay, 1982), p.52.
27
The Times of India, 18th August 1931, and The Free Press Journal, 11th October 1931.
28
This meeting was presided over by Mr. Sukharam Buwa, and the resolution moved by Mr.
B.J. Deorukhkar. For details see The Bombay Chronicle, 21st October 1931 and The Free
Press Journal, 21st October, 1931.
29
The President of the Dayanand Dalit Uddhar Mandal (Depressed Classes Uplift Association),
Punjab sent a cable to the Prime Minister and Gandhi by saying that “the Depressed Classes
do not want Separate Electorates. They will be satisfied with adult franchise and they have no
confidence in Dr. Ambedkar”. See, The Bombay Chronicle, 17th October 1931.
30
The Secretary, Untouchability Committee, Banares send a cable to Gandhi saying that
“Public meeting of Depressed Classes of Benares expresses no confidence in Dr. Ambedkar
and supports Congress demands”. For details see, The Free Press Journal, 28th October,
1931.
31
The Bombay Chronicle, 27th November, 1931.
32
The Times of India, 22nd September, also see B.G. Kunte, (Compiler), Source Material on Dr.
Babasaheb Ambedkar and the Movement of Untouchables, op. cit., p. 91.
44
33
A.C. Pradhan, The Emergence of the Depressed Classes, (Delhi, 1986), p. 250.
34
Gail Omvedt, Dalits and the Democratic Revolution: Dr. Ambedkar and the Dalit Movement
in Colonial India, (Delhi, 1994), p.262.
35
All-India Depressed Classes League also known as Akhil Bharatiya Dalit Jati Sangh founded
in Kanpur on 16-17 March 1935, and the Bihar Khet Mazdoor Sabha founded in 1937.
36
One could imagine how swift and prompt was Congress to stop Ambedkar and his followers
to emerge as a strong force. The Poona Pact was signed only on 24th September 1932, and a
meeting was convened by the Congress on the very next day i.e. 25th September. For details
J.C. Mandal, Poona Pact and the Depressed Classes, (Calcutta, 1999).
37
Gail Omvedt, Dalits and the Democratic Revolution, op. cit. p. 263.
38
The Times of India, 5th July 1939.
39
The Times of India, 22nd September, 1944.
40
Ibid.
41
Janata, 8th January, 1938, also see M.F. Ganjare, Dr.Babasaheba Ambedkaranci bhashane
(Marathi), (Nagpur, 1975), vol. III, p. 130.
42
Waman Meshram, “National Issues and Speeches”, for details see http:// www.
mulnivasibamcef.com/Pages/page3n.html (acquired on 10th April 2009).
43
Eleanor Zelliot, “Learning the use of Political means: The Mahars of Maharashtra”, in Rajni
Kothari, (ed.), Caste in Indian Politics, (New Delhi, Orient Blackswan), p. 53.
44
For details see, G.S. Malappa, History of the Freedom Movement in Karnataka, Vol. II,
(Mysore, 1966).
45
P.R. Venkata Swamy, Our Struggle for Emancipation, (Secunderabad, 1955), vol. II, p.656.
46
M.B. Gautam, “The untouchables Movement in Andhra Pradesh”, Harijan Conference
Souvenir (Hyderabad, 10-12 April 1976), pp.71-72.
47
Ambedkarite Malas were strongly behind Scheduled Castes Federation (SCF) and SCF won
LS seat etc.
48
Chamars and Jatavs of Uttar Pradesh joined the Bahujan Samaj movement of Kanshi Ram in
a big way since early 1980s and shifted completely towards Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) by
1990. Kanshi Ram accused Jagjivan Ram as a Chamcha (stooge of Congress), published
Chamcha Age- an era of stooges on the 50th anniversary of Poona Pact in 1982 on the
Congress government’s role on Dalits and weaned away all Chamars-Jatavs from Congress
45
party. He actually brought these caste men back to the Ambekarite fold since were strongly
behind Ambedkar’s Scheduled Caste Federation (SCF) in Uttar Pradesh till the end of 1960s.
49
Jupudi Prabhakara Rao, President of Mala Mahanadu and Governor’s nominee as MLC.
Karem Shivaji, also claims as State President of Mala Mahanadu. There is also a third group
within this Malas under the leadership of Mrs. Prameela Devi, wife of late P.V. Rao.
50
For details see Yagati Chinna Rao (ed.), Dividing Dalits; Writings on Sub-categorization of
Scheduled Castes, (New Delhi/Jaipur: Rawat Pubications, 2009), Appendix 1 and 2.
51
Ibid. Appendix 3.
52
The one and only exception is by Surinder S. Jodhka and Avinash Kumar, that too after three
decades of divisions. For details see, “Internal Classification of Scheduled Castes: The
Punjab Story”, Economic and Political Weekly, (October 27, 2007), pp.20-23.
53
It was first ever organized Dalit Massacre by the ruling Telugu Desam Party consists of
Kamma caste.
54
For details see K. Srinivasulu, Caste Class and Social Articulation in Andhra Pradesh:
Mapping Differential Regional Trajectories, (London: Overseas Development Institute,
2002), [Working Paper 179].
55
This massacre was under the Congress party and Reddy caste as a ruler of the state.
56
See Adapa Satyanarayana, Andhra Pradesh lo Noorendla Dalita Charitra,(Hyderabad, 2009).
57
I owe these ideas to Raja Sekhar Vundru whose critical reflections on the issue to a great
extent provided crucial insights on the complex situation. For details see “Andhra may see a
historic handshake”, Mail Today, (14 July 2008), p.15.
58
Mr. Devendra Goud was very powerful and influential person in TDP after N.R. Rama Rao
and N. Chandrababu Naidu in Telugu Desam Party. Goud later left the TDP to flout his own
party in the wake of Telangana separate state issue, later on this newly emerged party merged
with Praja Rajyam Party (PRP) of Chiranjeevi.
59
Mallepali Laxmaiah, noted Telugu freelance journalist, contributes regularly in Andhra Jyothi
and other Telugu Daily newspapers, and he is also one of the most important functionaries in
Centre for Dalit Studies, Hyderabad.
60
This victory rally termed as “Pradarshana” (parade), on 5th June 1994.
61
The term “Dandora” (literally means pronouncement / proclamation) refers to their traditional
profession. Traditionally the drum (Dappu) was used to make several announcements in the
village. The dappu is the most common traditional percussion instruments used in Andhra
society for making aware of or publicizing any event. From selling of pulses to the calling of
the village panchayat, all events are announced to the public. Similarly all rituals and festivals
will invariably have the dappu throughout, both while the rituals are taking place and in the
46
procession. For details see M. Nagabhushana Sarma, Folk Performing Arts of Andhra
Pradesh, (Hyderabad, 1995), pp. 50-51.
62
For details see Y. Chinna Rao, “Neo-Reservation Movement in Contemporary India: A Case
Study of Andhra Dalits”, Contemporary India, vol. 4, No. 3, (July-September 2005), pp.5376.
63
See Yagati Chinna Rao (ed.), Dividing Dalits, op.cit., Appendix 4 and 5.
64
For the complete details of the Statement see, Ibid., Appendix 4.
65
Ibid. Appendix 6.
66
Indian Express, 3 December 1999.
67
See Yagati Chinna Rao (ed.), Dividing Dalits, op.cit., Appendices No.8
68
For the extracts of the Judgement, Ibid. Appendix No. 9.
69
Ibid. Appendices Nos. 10, 11, and 12.
70
Ibid. Appendix 14.
71
Yoginer Gupta, “Panel of 8 Judges formed: Issue of Sub-Categorisation of SCs”, Tribune, 7
September 2006.
72
Ibid.
73
It is reported that Justice Doraiswami Raju, Justice S. Rajendra Babu and another retired
Chief Justice from Punjab have declined to head the Commission. For details see, Subodh
Ghildiyal, “Judge refuses to head panel to sub-categorise Scheduled Castes”, Times of India,
(5th December 2006).
74
See Yagati Chinna Rao (ed.), Dividing Dalits, op.cit., Appendix 14.
75
The NCSCSC sponsored a research study titled, “Evaluation study on the extent of benefits
accrued to all the Scheduled Castes Communities included in the Constitution (Scheduled
Castes) Order 1950 in Andhra Pradesh” through an independent research organization, Indian
Institute of Economics, Hyderabad.
76
Vikas Pathak, “SC Quota Fissures to Widen”, The Hindustan Times, 1st June 2008.
77
See Yagati Chinna Rao (ed.), Dividing Dalits, op.cit., Appendix 9.
78
The Government of India had appointed an Advisory Committee on 1st June 1965 regarding
the Reservations of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, headed by Mr. B.N. Lokur, the
then Law Secretary to Government of India, popular known as ‘Lokur Committee’ for
studying the implementation of reservations in all the states and to revise the lists of
47
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in a rational and scientific manner, if needed. But
recommendations and findings of the Committee were far from reality and that is why they
were not implemented.
79
See Yagati Chinna Rao (ed.), Dividing Dalits, op.cit., Appendix 14.
80
Ibid. Appendices 1 and 2.
81
Letter No. 1786-3WI-75/23005, dated 19th September, 1975, from the Secretary to
Government, Punjab Scheduled Caste and Backward Classes to All Heads of Departments,
Commissioners and Divisions District and Sessions Judges, Deputy Commissioners and
Registrar, Punjab and Haryana High Court and copy to others.
82
Letter No. 22/55/90-3GS-III, dated 9th November, 1994 from the Chief Secretary,
Government of Haryana to All Heads of Departments, Commissions of Ambala, Hissar,
Rohtak and Gurgaon Divisions and all Deputy Commissioners and Sub Divisional Officers
(Civil)in Haryana.
83
Hukum Singh, a member of the Gujjar caste and Minister for Parliamentary Affairs.
84
Ramapati Shastri, a Dhobi by caste and a Minister for Health and Family Affairs.
85
For details see, Purnima S. Tripathi, “Counting on Quota”, Frontline, Vol. 18, No. 16, (04-17
August 2001.
86
Ibid.
87
Purnima S. Tripathi, “A new calculation in Uttar Pradesh”, Frontline, Vol. 19, No. 16, (15-28
September, 2001).
88
The Hindu, 9 December 2006.
89
Vishwanath Rishi, a three-time legislator, and was the State Welfare Minister in 1989.
90
K.P. Ramaiah, an IAS officer of 1986 batch, Bihar cadre, and worked as collector in Palamu
and Madhepura districts and also been Commission at Saran and a divisional commissioner
of Magadh.
91
The other members of the commission include, Baban Raut, a social worker and scribe,
Rajendra Prasad Nutt, an advocate in the Patna High Court, and Chhote Lal Rajvanshi, a
postgraduate from Ranch University and social activist.
92
Amitabh Srivastava, “Caste Controversy”, India Today, (5 January 2008).
93
J.P. Yadav, “Nitish all set to carry forward his ‘Maha Dalit’ Agenda”, Bihara, January 5,
2008.
94
Ibid.
48
95
The Bihar Times, 21 November 2007.
96
The Hindu, 24 November 2008.
97
Outlook: India.com, November 30, 2008.
98
S. Viswanathan, “Separate Slice”, Frontline, Vol. 26, No.1, (03-16 January 2009).
99
S.R. Sankaran, “The Mala-Madiga Controversy – An Appeal to the Scheduled Castes”,
Sanghika Sankshema Samacharam, (June-July 1998), pp. 14-15. Also see Gail Omvedt,
Dalits and the Democratic Revolution, op. cit.; Chinna Rao Yagati, Dalits’ Struggle for
Identity: Andhra and Hyderabad, (New Delhi, 2003).
100
Y. Chinna Rao, “Change in Nomenclature: A Historical Note”, in Ambrose Pinto (ed.), Dalits
Assertion for Identity, (New Delhi, 1999), pp. 84-95; also see Dalit Studies: A
Bibliographical Handbook, (New Delhi, 2003), Introduction.
101
Proceedings of Law Department, Government of Madras, Law (General) Department, G.O.
No. 817, Dated 25 March 1922, [Legislative Council Resolution – January 1922]. Also see
M.B. Gautam, Bhagyodayam: Maadari Bhagya Reddi Varma, Life Sketch and Mission,
(Hyderabad, 1991).
102
Ibid.
103
Census of India, 1931, Vol. 14, Madras, Part I, p. 349.
104
The exact number of Adi-Andhras in 1931 was 664,844. J.H. Hutton, Census of India, 1931,
Part-I, Report, (Madras, 1933), p. 477.
105
The caste certificate of this particular “sub-caste” indicates as “Adi-Andhra Mala” and “AdiAndhra Madiga”. One can see it in the caste certificates prepared or issued by the concerned
authorities in the districts of East Godavari, West Godavari, Krishna and Guntur where this
particular “sub-caste” communities are prevalent. Even in the instance of marriage, where the
sub-caste/jati is considered to be the most important component, it is realized that the “AdiAndhra Mala” marries only a Mala of other neighboring district/region and “Adi-Andhra
Madiga” marries only a Madiga of neighboring district/region, irrespective of religion they
profess.
106
For instance see “LS passes Eight Bills in 17 Minutes without debate”, PTI, 23rd December
2008; also see The Times of India, 24 December 2008. These bills rushed through the Lok
Sabha were including the Post-Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research,
Chandigarh, Amendments to the Prevention of Corruption Act, Agricultural and Processed
Food Products Export Development Authority Amendment Bill, Compensatory Afforestation
Act, Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) UT Order (Amendment), South Asian University Bill,
Code of Criminal Procedure Amendment Bill and Collection of Statistics Bill.
107
The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Reservation in Posts and Services) Bill, 2008
49
was passed by the Rajya Sabha without discussion in December 2008, and it could be moved
further in the Lok Sabha following an advisory from the Law Ministry asking the government
to first consult the National Commission for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. This
means that the government was not aware that for any decision pertaining to Scheduled
Castes it needs to consult the National Commission for Scheduled Castes. For details see D.
Raja, “A Design to Block Opportunities”, The Hindu, 13 February 2009.
50