The chapter on “The Muslim OBCs and Affirmative Action”, is the Sachar Committee Report accepts the findings of the NSSO 61 Round to evaluate the population of Muslim OBCs and the rest at 40.7 and 59.3 % respectively of the National Muslim population. This comes to 5.5 and 7.9% of the national population. Elsewhere, the Report estimates the population of Dalit Muslims (SCs/STs) as 0.9 & 0.4% i.e.1.3% of the Muslim population, which comes to 0.18% of the national population, included in Muslim OBC.

Sociologists divide the Muslim Indians into Ashraf, Ajlaf and Arzal. This division reflects the impact the Indian caste system on Muslim society, its claim of equality not- withstanding, shows vertical stratification though, the Baradari System in Muslim Community is not as rigorous or pervasive. But anyone conversant with the composition of the Muslim society at the ground level will reject the NSSO figures. The Sachar Report should have rejected them outright and worked out its own estimates on other available evidence. These figures place a big question mark on the credibility and methodology of the NSS which is based on limited selective survey and individual responses. The generally accepted estimate of the so called Ashraf (Syed, Sheikh, Pathan, Mughal etc.) is 10-15%, of the Ajlaf 70-75%, and that of the Arzal 10-15% of the Muslim population.

The Arzal have an occupational affinity with the SC’s,(the erstwhile Achhuts) whose national population is 15%. On the other hand, the STs, (Adivasis) are estimated at 7.5%. They are not defined by religion but include very few Muslims. The total of SC/ST comes to 22.5% where as the Arzal population is as low 0.18 % of the national population.

It is accepted, that 90-95% of Muslim Indians are descendants of converts from Hinduism. The foreign-born Muslims who had migrated to Indias. along with converts from high castes who were much better integrated with the Muslim elite during the Muslim rule and together they formed the bulk of the Ashraf.
In Hindu society, there is a clear distinction between the Shudras who form part of the Chaturvarna system and the Achhuts who do not. In respect of conversion to Islam, the proportion of Achhuts can be presumed to exceed that of the Shudras because the former suffered severe disabilities under the Hindu order, had unclean occupations and possessed little in terms of social assets such as land. The Shudras were engaged in clean occupations, held and cultivated land, paid revenue and suffered much less grievously in the social sense. They had the social and economic resources to structure a society of their own. The relevant proportion among muslims may be worked out on the presumption of a decreasing stream of conversion as one goes up the caste ladder. The best estimate of the caste division in the Hindu society is 15% Savarnas, 65% Shudras and 20% Achhuts. This supports the thesis that the Ajlaf and the Arzal between them account for estimatedly 70-75% of the Muslim population.

‘OBC’ is a constitutional construet. Therefore neither the Hindu nor the Muslim OBCs constitute a monolithic group. OBC’s are a conglomerate of Hindu sub-castes, and Muslim baradaris. The Achhuts (SC) and the Adivasis (ST) also have divisions. The term OBC acquired political currency when the agricultural masses gained political power though adult franchise. Subsequently, their economic status improved as the main beneficiaries of the zamindari abolition and the Green Revolution. In recognition of their political hold in rural area, they were recognized as Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC’s) under Article 15 (4) of the Constitution. To distinguish them from SCs/STs whom the Constitution itself recognized as Backward Classes and to whom it granted privileges and facilities as a collective reparation for centuries of repression and a mark of atonement by the Hindu society, the Shudras who entered the arena of power were designated as Other Backward Classes or OBCs. Many Muslim groups which had the same occupation were also included among the OBCs.

 
The Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950, defined the SCs as Hindus. So the comparable Muslim groups which had the same occupation and social status as the Hindus SCs were left out. To accommodate them the OBC Lists were opened. Thus all Non-Ashraf are now placed in common same OBC Lists.

 
But there are many similar Muslim groups left out either because they did not show any interest out of ignorance or found it derogatory or lacked political backing or were simply denied entry. The Mandal Repost did include many Muslim groups in the OBC Lists, and estimated the total OBC population at 52%, including 8.6% non-Hindus. Since the Supreme Court had placed a ceiling of 50% on total reservation and since 22.5% was constitutionally earmarked for SCs/STs only 27.5 per cent was available. The Mandal Commission, therefore, proposed and received 27 per cent quota for the OBCs. The National Backward Classes Commission was formed with similar Commissions in several States empowered to modify the OBC Lists on request from the excluded. Soon the political and economic importance and benefit of inclusion in the OBC Lists became visible to the people. Today all weaker sections and groups even some from the higher castes and baradaris are lining up to get into the OBC Lists, either through the Commissions or through the Census, using all political pressure they can muster. The Supreme Court judgment in Inder Sawhney case legitimized the basic principles of the Mandal dispensation though it did not envisage an automatic translation of castes into classes, but a group- by -group scrutiny to decide whether a particular caste or group constituted a Backward Class. But the judgment failed to provide a scientific definition of the term or identify easily accessible and universally applicable parameters and a rational methodology for recognition as an OBC, or a scientific basis for determination of levels of backwardness and reservation quotas. Obviously the reservation quota cannot depend only on population of an OBC or only on its level of backwardness, as there may be groups with high population but low level of backwardness and vice versa. A scientific and rational approach must consider both the population and the level of backwardness of any claimant group and sub-group with periodical revision.

Unfortunately, the Central Government has, for reasons best know to itself, has stopped the Caste Census since 1951. Such a Census would not only count the population of each social group or sub-group but yield data to estimate its backwardness.

Today it is being asserted that since the SCs and STs have been constitutionally provided with reservation equal to their proportion in population, the OBCs should also collectively enjoy the same weightage i.e. a quota equal to population. That would be scientifically absurd because among the OBCs in many States there are groups which suffer no social disabilities like the SC/ST but, on the other hand, enjoy high representation in the Executive (both Political and Permanent) as well as in Legislatures and Judiciary and which are at the top of the economic and professional ladder comparable to the well placed Savarnas. However, the situation has become so politicized that no Central or State Government has the will even to touch those ‘neo-Savarnas’ which also exist among the SC/ST albeit to a lesser extent and the minorities.

The Inder Sawhney judgment had conceptualized the exclusion of the Creamy Layer from the quota benefit. Today the Supreme Court is inclined to apply the concept across the board in all fields including education and for all Backward Classes. This is being resisted by the political parties, the Central Government and many State Governments. In the mean time, the concept of Creamy Layer has itself been diluted by raising the economic limit so high that it leaves out very few and lets in almost every one. The Supreme Court would be justified to define the Creamy Layer for universal application to all States and all Backward Classes. This should be based on family assets and income, relative to national average.

The Muslim baradaris included in the OBC Lists however, face severe communal bias for historical and political reasons and therefore do not enjoy true equality or full parity with the Hindu OBCs. This hurdle to equality of opportunity cannot be overcome except by categorization within the OBCs. The only State which has made valiant effort to recognize and remove this hurdle is Karnataka which divides the OBC’s into 5 categories and accommodates the Muslims Community as a whole in one exclusive category with a quota of 4 per cent. Even though the quota is very small, it concretizes the principles of categorization by level of backwardness, and also eligibility of a religious community for reservation. However it failed to lay down a scientific basis for categorization and determination of quota.
It had been asserted that the Muslims, as a religious community, cannot get reservation. Constitutionally neither can a caste, group, unless it found to be a Backward Class. So if a Muslim group or the Muslim community as a whole is found to be a Backward Class by the same criteria and with the same parameters, there is no reason at all for denial. Indeed Karnataka, and now Tamil Nadu have blazed the trail.

The Sachar Report states in unequivocal terms that the Muslim community as a whole is more or less at the same level of backwardness as the SCs/STs and that it is at the bottom of the OBC ladder. Logically, it should have recommended reservation for the Community as such. But it did not and failed the test of justice and equity. Perhaps it did not wish to create difficulties for the government.
There is, however, an apprehension among the non-Ashraf majority of Muslims that there cannot be a fair competition within the Muslim category and that the Ashraf will swamp the non-Ashraf out of their rightful benifits, in the same way as the Savarnas yesterday deprived the non-Savarnas and the Forward Shudras today deprive the Backward Shudras. It is essential that the all leaders of the Muslim Community who should understand that despite the Constitution, the law and the precedent being on their side, it faces a historic mental block at every step which has constantly deprived it of equality of opportunity and its due share in all measures for social justice or positive affirmation. This obstacle can be overcome only if, the Community stands firmly united and agitates peacefully and democratically for its due rights. The non-Ashraf must lead the campaign because they will not get their due share in a common OBC quota.

But the Ashraf, and the Muslim, leadership must also come forward with wisdom and reason to assuage the apprehensions of the non-Ashraf. First, they must unconditionally support the exclusion of the Creamy Layer. Secondly, they should plead for inclusion, within the ambit of reservation, of only those candidates who come from backward families which are infact economically and educationally deprived. Thirdly, they should volunteer that the baradaris, which have been notified as OBC’s shall enjoy preference and priority in Muslim quota and the Ashraf shall be admitted to the quota if, and to the extent that, the Muslim quota is not fully utilised.

Coming back to the question of OBC population, the only way to correct the discrepancy is a proper Census which asks a person about his caste / baradaris and not its constitutional status, whether OBC/SC/ST, along with well designed questions on economic and educational status of the family. From the collected data both the population and the level of backwardness of all castes and groups can be determined, and consequently their due quota.

Obviously, the quotas for many big groups with lower levels of backwardness will be small. So will be quotas for small groups with higher levels of backwardness. Only big groups with high levels of backwardness shall have a sizeable quota. Small quota holders should have the option of forming a larger viable group by merger or joining an existing group with which they have affinity. The OBC quotas, State-wise or nationally, shall be the sum total of individual sub-quotas of various constituent caste/groups. It may exceed 50 per cent in many States. This possibility should be recognized and corrected by the Supreme Court. In any case there is no reason for Muslim OBCs or the Muslim community as a whole to be content with its share under the Mandal dispensation or even with what was carved for it in the Karnataka model.

However, some Muslim baradaris which are occupationally akin to the Hindu SCs, demand inclusion in the SC Lists. This can be easily achieved by amending the 1950 Order or rewriting the Act. This will be as a step towards secularism but this will not be done for many reasons, the most important being that the India’s state looks upon itself as a protector of Hindu interests and would not like to open the door any mass conversion of SCs to Islam or Christianity. Also Muslim Dalits will never share the SC privilege of political representation. Their destiny lies with the larger Muslim Community and with education and employment and better social interaction, they shall find their due place.

To sum up, the Muslim community as a whole should be recognized as a separate category within the OBC. Its sub-quota should take into account the national Muslim population i.e. 13.4% and its overall backwardness of 90% compared to SC/ST. This will give it a sub-quota of 12%.

The alternative is to limit reservation to non-Ashraf only who constitutes 90% of the Community and thus about 12% act of the national population. With their average level of backwardness being almost equal to that of SC/ST, they would be entitled to a separate sub-quota of 11%.

In this event the Hindu OBC’s also demand a higher quota than the present notional quota of 18.4% and the Hindu high castes also get a quota, it will be necessary to break through the judicial limit of 50%. A law will then be needed to allow the total quota to have no limit and vary from state to state and at the center.

Time has come for the nation to examine in depth the adhoc system of reservation that the nation has installed over the years since 1950, and to build a flaw-less system based on scientific analysis as well as common principles, parameters and methodology, applicable to all Backward Classes who fall below the national level in education or employment, level of family income or assets or access to welfare and services provided by the state.


New Delhi
1 May, 2007                                                                                                    Syed Shahabuddin

Muslim India
MONTHLY
JOURNAL OF REFERENCE, RESEARCH AND DOCUMENTATION
VOL. XXIV NO. 275 CONTENTS MAY, 2007

FROM THE EDITOR`S DESK: Muslim Community, Muslim OBCs & Reservation 2
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS OF INTEREST 47
EDUCATION: AIMMM on Sex Education in Schools 15
* Teachers Appeal for Peace on AMU Campus Aligarh, 28 April, 007
GOVERNMENT: Ministry of Minority Affairs Annual Report for 2006-07 4
HINDU COMMUNALISM : Muslims Face to Face with Hindu Communalism 8
GUJARAT MASSACRE: Harsh Mander on Failure of Reconciliation in Gujarat 26
HINDU NATIONALISM: Jaffrelot on Tactical Changes in ‘Hindu Nationalism 28
* Asghar Ali Engineer on BJP’s Anti Muslimism, 29
* Muslims Forced into Assimilation under Siege by Ratna Kapur 30
KASHMIR SITUATION: Gautam Navlakha on Limit of Indo-Pak Deal for Peace 31
* Suggestions by Working Groups: A move for Consensus by Praveen Swami 34
MONUMENTS: Seven Ancient Masjids in Delhi Built during Tughlak beriod 41
MUSLM WORLD: Prof Ghazali on Rand Corporation’s New Recipe for Muslims 42
* M. Hamid Ansari on Arab Summit‘s Initiative on West Asia 43
* Worship by Hindu at Katas Raj Temples in Pakistan 44
* Pakistan Human Right Commission on Missing Hindus 44
* Palestine: Jewish Chronicle on Israel Lobby‘s Support, level in USA 45
* Scott Ritter on AIPAC‘s Role in USA, New York Times Report and
Reuters on Israeli Army Veterans on Occupation
NATIONAL POLITICS: * BJP‘s Hate CD in UP 18
* Statement by National Commission for Minorities 20
* Editorial, The Hindu and The Hindustan Times 21
* BSP: A New Rainbow for UP, Congress on Downslide 23
* Many Claimants for Muslim Vote in UP-Text 23
*Venkitesh Ramakrishnan For a Winning Formula in UP ,
* Hindu Vote Bank Viewed from the Right and Caste Factor in UP 25
* Vidya Subrahmaniam on The Fringe and the Mainstream 25
OVERVIEW: Badri Raina on Indian Muslims 7
RESERVATION: Abusaleh Shariff For Substantive Policy
Formulation Beyond Quotas 16
*P V Indiresan on Myth of Caste Division in Backwardness 17
SECULARISM : Mushirul Hasan on Concept of Minority 9
* AIMMM on Allahabad High Court Ruling 10
* Gurpreet Mahajan on Determination of Minority Status 10
*,Editorials in The Times of India, and the Hindustan Times,
SOCIAL JUSTICE: Gail Omvedt‘s A Plea for Caste Census 12
* Jug Suraiya on Many Farzanias which We Ignore 12
* N.G. Jayal on Many Inequalities 13
* Vandita Mishra on Need for a Party for All People 13
SACHAR REPORT: Joint Committee of Muslim Organizations Common Charter 14
UNEMPLOYMENT: Report on Sharp Fall in Muslim Employment during 5years 15
URDU: Balraj Puri on Plight of Urdu-speaking Muslims, 35
* AIMMM on All Parties Silence on Urdu in UP 37
* Situation of Urdu in Civil Service Examination 38
UPRISING OF 1857: Research Article by Shahid Amin 39