image source, Getty Images
While the issue of economic reservation is being discussed at the national level, Tamil Nadu is one of the states in the country that provides the highest percentage of reservation on social grounds. How did this happen?
Reservation of seats has been in force in Tamil Nadu since 1928 when the Communal G.O. was implemented in Tamil Nadu. At that time reservation was ensured not only for the oppressed and backward people but also for the advanced classes including Brahmins through this communal GO.
According to this order, when giving job opportunities in government offices, they should be grouped into 12 places and give job opportunities. Accordingly, out of 12 seats, two seats should be given to Brahmins, five seats to non-Brahmins, two seats to Muslims, two seats to Christians, Europeans and Anglo-Indians. A seat should be given to a person belonging to an oppressed section.
Percentage-wise, the reservation was 44% for non-Brahmins, 16% for Brahmins, 16% for Muslims, 16% for Anglo-Indians and Christians, and 8% for Scheduled Tribes.
After the Constitution of India came into force, when two students went to the Supreme Court challenging this ordinance, this communal G.O. Adjudged invalid. The reservation is hereby cancelled.
After this the Constitution of India was amended to provide for reservation. After this in Tamil Nadu, reservation of 25 per cent for backward classes and 16 per cent for scheduled classes came into effect.
When M. Karunanidhi was the Chief Minister, A.N. Chattanathan set up the first Backward Persons Commission. This commission made its recommendations in 1970. Based on that, reservation for backward classes was increased to 31 percent. The reservation for scheduled castes has been increased to 18 percent.
This 31 percent reservation, rising to 50 percent is an interesting history. Chief Minister in 1979 M.G. Ramachandran proposed an economic definition of reservation for backward classes. An order to this effect (MS no. 1156) was issued on 2nd July 1979. Accordingly, it was announced that the annual income of the family should not exceed 9 thousand rupees to get reservation.
MG said that it will be implemented as per the recommendations of Chattanathan Commission. Ramachandran. In the 1980 parliamentary elections, M.G. ADMK led by Ramachandran failed miserably. MGR attributed this failure to economic definition of reservation. Removed the economic limit. He also increased the reservation for backward classes from 31 percent to 50 percent. As a result, the overall seat allocation has risen to 68 percent.
image source, Getty Images
In 1989, the DMK headed by M. Karunanidhi The government has reserved 20 per cent seats for most backward and 30 per cent for remaining backward out of 50 per cent reservation. 1 percent reservation for tribals. Subsequently, the total reservation level rose to 69 percent.
During that period, there was no ceiling on reservation in force. V.P. who was the prime minister at the same time. When Singh reserved 27 percent of central government jobs for backward classes, there were riots and protests across the country, except in some states. A case was filed in this regard.
In a 1992 judgment in this regard, 27 percent reservation in central government jobs was allowed. However, it directed that the overall reservation should not exceed 50 percent. Due to this, there was a problem with the reservation which was implemented in Tamil Nadu since 1980.
Speaking in the Legislative Assembly in April 1993, the then Backward Welfare Minister Jayakumar said, “Considering that if the 69 percent total seat quota in Tamil Nadu is reduced to 50 percent as per the Supreme Court order, it will cause social unrest in our state, the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister has said that he may file a review petition in the Supreme Court and seek a re-order.” informed that.
In this situation, K.M. who was a member of Voice Council organization. Vijayan filed a case against the Tamil Nadu government’s reservation policy. In this case, Chief Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah, Justice S.G. A bench comprising Aggarwal issued a notice to the Tamil Nadu government.
image source, Getty Images
On August 25, 1993, an interim ban was imposed on more than 50 percent reservation in medical and engineering colleges in Tamil Nadu.
In this regard, the then Chief Minister J. In a statement issued by Jayalalithaa, she said, “The government will continue to make efforts until the Supreme Court accepts the position taken by Tamil Nadu on the reservation policy and its policy”. All the parties of Tamil Nadu unanimously supported the government in this matter.
Various organizations started protests. There was also a struggle to send Ashes to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court against the court order banning 69 percent reservation.
Meanwhile, Madras High Court Judges K.S. said that 69 percent seat reservation may continue in the post-graduate medical course. A Bench consisting of Bhaktavatchalam, T. Raju, passed the judgment.
Meanwhile, a resolution was passed in the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly on November 9 to amend the Constitution of India so that 69 percent reservation would continue in Tamil Nadu. On November 16, a complete blockade was held across Tamil Nadu. An all-party meeting was held on November 26 to discuss the next steps.
In this meeting, Dravidar Kazhagam president K. Veeramani said. The Supreme Court verdict is that if the reservation goes beyond 50 percent, it will be against Article 14 of the Constitution. Former Justice Venugopal said that if a law is enacted under Article 31C, it cannot be said to be inconsistent with the Constitution.
Subsequently, the Legislative Assembly convened on 30th December 1993, a separate bill for reservation was tabled and passed. After this, lakhs of telegrams were sent to the President and Prime Minister asking them to approve the Act. But the approval of the President was not received.
image source, Getty Images
In this situation, on June 25, 1994, the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu. Led by Jayalalithaa, Prime Minister Narasimha was urged to approve the bill. After this, Prime Minister Narasimha Rao held a meeting with various ministries on July 14. In this situation, President Sankardayal Sharma gave approval to the Tamil Nadu Government Act on 9th July.
Even so, as the courts have the right to examine this law, the members of Parliament from Tamil Nadu insisted that it should be brought under Article 9 of the Constitution under Article 31 (B).
Subsequently, the Central Government decided on 13 August 1994 to seek the approval of the Parliament to include this Act in the 9th Schedule. Accordingly, the constitutional amendment was passed in the Parliament of India on August 24.
In this case, a case was filed that the 69 percent quota in medical college admissions should not be followed. The Supreme Court ruled on 17 November 1994 that medical admission should be conducted on the basis of 50 percent reservation. There was a lot of opposition to this verdict in Tamil Nadu.
In a subsequent case, it ruled on July 22, 1996 that additional seats should be created in medical and engineering colleges to compensate for the loss of seats to the previous classes due to the creation of 69 per cent seats.
After this, cases are continuously being filed against the 69 percent reservation. A case was filed in 2012 by five students who claimed they were denied seats due to 69 per cent reservation. No judgment has been given.
image source, Getty Images
In 2014 and 2015, some students filed a similar case. Notice sent to Tamil Nadu Govt. No verdict has been reached in these cases.
As the law allowing 69 per cent reservation is in the 9th Schedule of the Constitution, it cannot be examined by the courts. The Tamil Nadu government feels that it cannot file a case in this regard.
But in 2007, the Supreme Court ruled in a case that the court can interfere with laws under the Ninth Schedule if they affect the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution.
The then Chief Justice Y.K. A 9-judge bench headed by Sabharwal delivered the verdict. The court held that the same body cannot have the power to enact a law and to review its validity.
Also, another constitution bench ruled in October 2007 that reservation is 50 per cent and is anti-discriminatory. Beyond that, it would be discriminatory to another section, it said.
At present, the position of the Supreme Court is that after the judgment in Kesavananda Bharati case, i.e. after 24th April, 1973, all laws added to the 9th Schedule are subject to judicial review.
The 9th Schedule to the Constitution was created by the First Amendment in 1951. There are currently 284 Acts in this Schedule which was created to protect Land Reform Acts.
BBC Tamil on Social Media: