Arjun Singh’s proposal to introduce 27 per cent reservations for OBCs in institutions of higher education now has to contend with three arguments. First, from the Election Commission that is rightly exercised over the timing. Second, from the group of ministers’ reservations—pun intended—over another, related quick fix—job quotas in the private sector. Third, from Knowledge Commission head Sam Pitroda’s genuine expression of surprise as to why the body he heads wasn’t consulted before a decision that it can advise over was announced. The organized, corporatised private sector hires only some three per cent of the workforce. Its role in creating a level playing field for Indian citizens is severely constrained for this reason. Besides, businesses are in the business of making money and the right and freedom to decide whom they should hire is intrinsic to that mandate. The captains of Indian industry have recently gone on record reiterating their social commitment. They too would want to contribute towards ending the country’s ugly legacy of caste discrimination. But while they would be happy to explore various measures of affirmative action (like providing educational opportunities for the socially disadvantaged), they are strongly opposed to being shackled by statutory reservations in these extremely competitive and globalised times. Which is why our founding fathers were sensible enough not to pursue the idea of job reservations in the private sector. Which is why the GoM has, not surprisingly, run into a constitutional wall. The care this body took to approach the subject through a process of consultation with constitutional experts is exemplary. If the HRD minister had exhibited a similar attention to detail, the country may have been spared some of the acrimony that this divisive issue has already generated. That Arjun Singh did not even bother to inform the Knowledge Commission about the crucial step he is contemplating—and its chairman has confirmed this in an interview with The Sunday Express—speaks volumes for the importunate nature of his stance. With the EC now asking questions that will be somewhat difficult to answer—what would have been lost even for Singh’s vision of social justice had the decision come after the assembly elections—the HRD minister might have to repent. He certainly deserves to.
