What is the background of reservation for Economically Backward Classes (EBCs) in Rajasthan? Fourteen per cent reservation for economically weaker sections among the forward castes was first floated by the Ashok Gehlot-led Congress government in 2003. The government had forwarded the proposal to the Atal Bihari Vajpayee-led NDA government at the Centre for implementation, since it required a constitutional amendment. With elections due that year in three states, and Lok Sabha elections scheduled the following year, the BJP made serious efforts on its own for an EBC quota. Barely four days after the Gehlot cabinet’s decision, a panel of senior BJP leaders led by L K Advani proposed the setting up of a national commission within a week to look into the possibility of reservations for EWS among the forwards. However, the Centre did not pursue the matter further, reportedly after Vajpayee was advised by Attorney General Soli Sorabjee that quota for upper caste EWS was not constitutionally tenable. In 2008, the Vasundhara Raje government passed the Rajasthan SC, ST, BC, SBC and EBC (Reservation of Seats in Educational Institutions in the State and of Appointments and Posts in Services under the State) Act, providing for 5% reservation to Gujjars, Banjaras, Raikas, Gadarias and Gadia Lohars, and 14% to the poorer sections among forward castes. However, the implementation of the act was stayed by the High Court in 2010. In 2012, the Ashok Gehlot government attempted to give 5% reservation to the Special Backward Classes (Gujjars and four other communities). In January 2013, the High Court retained 1% reservation and stayed 4%. Earlier this month, the Vasundhara Raje cabinet cleared two draft laws providing for reservation in state government jobs to SBCs and EBCs, which include poorer sections among forward castes. Following a 10-day Gujjar agitation, the government had on May 28 promised to bring the two laws. What is likely to happen now? Unlike the earlier attempt, the Raje government has this time piloted two separate Bills through the Assembly, one each for SBC and EBC quota. The government hopes that the SBC Act would be able to withstand judicial scrutiny, on the grounds of additional quota under exceptional circumstances — a point argued by senior lawyer Indira Jaising while defending the state government’s 2012 Act. The EBC Bill, however, has a slim chance of survival. Articles 330-342 under Part 16 of the Consitution outline special provisions for certain classes. The Constitution identifies four such classes — SCs, STs, Backward Classes and Anglo Indians — and the insertion of new classes like EBCs are likely to be deemed illegal, experts say. The state government could request the Centre to insert the two new quota Acts in the Ninth Schedule, thus shielding them from judicial scrutiny. However, the Supreme Court, in I R Coelho v State of Tamil Nadu, ruled that laws that violated the basic structure of the Constitution would be open to judicial review, including any law added to the Ninth Schedule after April 24, 1973. An option before the government could be to subdivide the OBC into different lists, and provide differential reservations, similar to what states like Haryana have done. However, the Jats — most dominant among the OBCs — would strongly oppose such a step.
