Published date: Mar 16th-29th 1981, New Delhi

THE violence and the passions that have unleashed a caste war in Gujarat have found sympathetic onlookers in Tamil Nadu. These onlookers may not remain passive: they are already contemplating demonstrations of support for the anti- reservationists in Gujarat.

“If it’s necessary, we’ll all go to Gujarat and join the agitation,” bursts out Mrs. Bagalakumari Pillai, vice- correspondent of the Shrine Vailan-kanni School in Madras and president of the Madras District unit of the Tamil Nadu Oppressed People’s Movement. “We have lost all faith in the Government. We are law-abiding citizens, but the politicians seem to be impressed only by a show of force.”

The Tamil Nadu Oppressed People’s Movement (TNOPM) was formed as a direct result of growing attacks on forward communities and Brahmins in Tamil Nadu’s deep south. A clash in Tirunelveli between members of the Dravida Kazhagam (DK) and Brahmins led to the formation of the movement by LS Marthandam, a retired collector of Customs and Central Excise. Marthandam organized a rally to protest discrimination against the forward castes in Palayamkottai on 20 July 1980. More than 25.000 people participated in the rally, and the movement was launched.

Today, it enjoys a state-wide membership of over 50,000. The majority of its supporters belong to the south- ern Tamil Nadu districts of Madurai, Coimbatore, Tirunelveli, Ramanatha- puram and Tiruchirapalli.

Although the Tamil Nadu Brahmins’ Association has been trying to protect the interests of its upper- caste members, it has remained more or less a “social gathering” (according to a critic) and concentrates more on the rituals and the traditions of Hinduism. The TNOPM, on the other hand, has members belonging to eight ‘for- ward’ communities-Brahmins, Pillais, Mudaliars, Chettiars, Naidus, Nairs, Reddiars and Christians.

“Brahmins are more cosmopolitan,” says Mrs Pillai’s husband Kumarasamy, one of the three vice- presidents of the district unit, “and that is why they have been suppressed. Thirty-three years is too long a period to perpetuate the reservations crutch for the ‘lower’ castes. Tamil leaders like Vedaratnam Pillai, Subramania Bharathi and VO Chidambaram have always fought against casteism.”

The history: In 1951, a fourth clause was added to article 15 of the Constitution to override the decision of the Supreme Court in case of the ‘State of Madras versus Champakam Dorairajan.’ This Amendment, Article 15 (4) was, incidentally, the first amendment to the Constitution. Article 15 (4) made it mandatory for the state to reserve seats for backward classes and SC/ST candidates in educational institutions as well as to make other special provisions. Subsequently, the Madras Government introduced reservations of 15 per cent SCs and STs and 25 per cent for BSs. In July 1955 reservations for SCs and STs were raised to 16 per cent.

The Tamil Nadu Backward Class Commission (AN Sattanathan Com- mission) was appointed by the Government of Tamil Nadu in 1969. The majority of the Commission’s members opposed reservation on the basis of caste. They observed that ‘caste’ should not be equated with ‘class’. They recommended an income limit of Rs 9,000 annually in order to determine ‘backward classes’.

The Sattanathan Commission also recommended raising the reservation for all the backward classes to 33 per cent, which, along with the 16 per cent reservation for SC and ST, would total 49 per cent, and would not exceed the 50 per cent limit laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of MR Balaji versus State of Mysore” (1963).

In the Balaji case, the Supreme Court observed that Art 15(4) is a special provision, an exception, and that the fundamental rights of the rest of the citizens could not be ignored. The court held that a special provision must not exceed 50 per cent of all the seats or jobs. It also held that categorisation of the backward classes on the basis of caste is not permitted by Art 15(4).

MGR’s about-turn: The DMK Government stuck to the below-50 per cent convention. In mid-1979, MGR’s AIADMK Government imposed an income limit of Rs 9,000, and the Chief Minister defended the order, saying that “social justice and fairness demand it.” In early 1980, however, the AIADMK Government was faced with the prospect of defeat in the forthcoming Assembly elections. Other political parties, meanwhile, stepped up their attacks on the Rs 9.000 limit. To everyone’s great surprise, therefore, MGR’s government, vide Orders 72 and 73 dated 1 February 1980, withdrew the income limit of R$ 9,000 and simultaneously raised the reservation to the backward classes from 31 per cent to 50 per cent. This meant that the reservations in Tamil Nadu today total 68 per cent (18 per cent for SCs and STs and 50 per cent for BCs). The remaining 32 per cent are open to competition. Out of this, there are further reservations for Sri Lanka repatriates, Burma repatriates, handicapped persons, sports people, and ex-defence personnel. This usually results in less than 10 percent of admissions in colleges and recruitments in jobs remaining open to com- petition by the forward classes.

The Sattanathan commission observed that nine backward castes (out of 370 castes and sub-castes) have entrenched themselves strongly and are virtually monopolising openings. These communities are Vaduvan (Vadugan), Thuluva Vellala, Agamudaiyan, Gavara, Virakoodi Vellalar, Sourashtra, Sadhu Chetty, Kaikolan, and Devanga. Although this group constitues only 11.3 per cent of the total backward-class population, their share of the total number of jobs is 37.3 per cent in non-gazetted and 48.2 per cent in gazetted posts. In educational scholarships, these nine castes corner 34.3 per cent of the scholarships. They account for 44.3 per cent of engineering college seats and 47.3 per cent of medical college seats.

IN this situation, the Tamil Nadu Oppressed People’s Movement (TNOPM) symbolises the growing an- ger, frustration and militancy among the “forward’ castes. “The Government ought to increase intelligence by raising standards,” says Mrs Pillai. “Instead, it is lowering the foundations of our society. The backward class students know they can get away with little work. The forward class students, on the other hand, work hard, get good marks, and yet fail to obtain admission in colleges. As a result, they too lose interest in studying. The country is losing on both sides.”

“There is not much unity among the forward classes in Tamil Nadu mainly because they abhorred agitation and confrontation,” says Mrs Pillai. “But one generation has gone by. and yet you have Justice VR Krishna Iyer and Justice Chinappa Reddy throwing out an anti- reservation suit in the Supreme Court last November on grounds of ‘social justice’. In 1947, Ambedkar wanted ten years’ time to give the backward classes their due. By the time two general elections came and went (in 1952 and 1957), the politicians knew that the backward classes were their best vote banks. So the reservations were enhanced by another 10 years every decade.”

“If a SC or ST boy says that two plus two equals three. he gets full marks,” explodes B Srinivasan, the organising secretary of the Madras unit. “The people of Tamil Nadu-the forwards-are highly educated. If they are insulted. woe betide the Government.”

Ripples: Ripples are already spreading out from the anti- reservationnists in Tamil Nadu. On 13 February, for instance. the Coordination Committee of different oppressed employees’ associations-in the P and T, Railways and Food Corporation of India held a meeting at which joint secretary Professor MS Narayanan condemned the “dangerous policy of earmarking promotions for junior, in- experienced SC and ST employees even in vulnerable railway posts like drivers, guards and station masters without any regard for suitability and merit.”

Professor Narayanan pointed out that the driver of the Trivandrum mail (involved in a three-train smash-up near Vaniyambadi on 11 February, in which more than 300 people are estimated to have died) had “allegedly held the post of a Khalasi until 1969 and was given a very quick promotion to the special ‘A’ Grade under the reservation quota.”

THE major test, would lie in a bunch of 24 writ petitions now Iying before the Supreme Court. challenging quotas for scheduled castes and tribes and backward classes in job recruitments and promotions and educational institutions. The petitions revolve around a central suit filed by the Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karam chari Sangh . (Railways)-the All India Oppressed Employees’ Association-which. praying for the quashing of reservations in promotions in the Railways, raises two fundamental constitutional questions. They are: does the term “appointments” in the Constitution, in connection with reservations, also include promotions, and secondly: what precisely are the criteria on the basis of which certain classes are categorized as “backward”?

The three petitioners (representing the ABSKS) are K Duraisamy, a senior train clerk at Arkonam and secretary-general, south zone, of the Sangh, K Gnanasekaran, a driver in the Madras division of the Southern Railway, and PV Ratnachalam, a junior clerk in the Tiruchirapalli division. The 208-page petition, containing dozens of case studies and 26 annexures, makes fascinating reading. It builds up a considerable case against caste reservations. It was first filed on 18 September 1979.

On 16 October that year, justices RS Sarkaria and O Chinnappa Reddy of the Supreme Court granted a stay order, restraining the Government from implementing caste reservations in job promotions. On 11 December 1979, however, the stay order was vacated after the Government pleaded that there would be a huge protest from SC/ST and backward-class quarters, and that it would be unfair to undo, in one stroke, what had been wrought in 32 years. Any promotions made thereafter, said the Government lawyers, would be “subject to disposal of the case.”

The case then went up for hearing before a three-judge division bench. The petitioners’ case was that reservations in promotions totaling more than 50 per cent contravened Art 335 and affected efficiency. (Art 335 reads: “The claims of the members of the scheduled castes and the scheduled tribes shall be taken into consideration, consistently with the maintenance of efficiency of administration, in the making of appointments to services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State !! “However, on 14 November 1980 (a day before he retired) Justice VR Krishna Iyer, on behalf of himself and his colleague Justice O Chinnappa Reddy, dismissed the petition on grounds of “social justice” and said reservations of over 50 per cent were permissible.

The petitioners have now filed a review petition, pleading that the case be heard by a constitutional bench. which would have an odd number of judges and be headed by the Chief Justice. Hearings are going on currently to determine whether or not to take up the review petition. Indications are that the petition (and along with it the 23 other pending petitions) will come up for hearing any day now. Duraisamy and Others versus the Union of India is being pleaded by a battery of eminent law years that includes Shanti Bhushan, VM Tarkunde, Frank Anthony and KK Venu- gopal.

The Ministry of Home Affairs, in its resolution No 42/21/49 NHS dated 13 September 1950, says in Para 4(1): The orders regarding reservation of vacancies in favour of various communities will not apply to recruitment by promotion, which will continue to be made as heretofore irrespective of communal considerations and on the basis of seniority and/or merit as the case may be.”

This portion of the resolution has been deliberately omitted in successive brochures issued by the Railway Board on reservations for scheduled castes and tribes in railway services, thus misleading thousands of employees who belong to ‘forward’ classes. The board has not stopped at this dishonesty. In its letter No E(SCT)/ 74-CM/15/34 dated 31 August 1974, the Board ordered promotions of employees who had failed at the selection/test for promotion, by choosing the best among the failed SC/ST employees.

Case studies: The writ petition contains dozens of amazing examples of discrimination against forward-caste candidates. A few will illustrate the point dramatically:

SS Fernando, 58, and TJ Rachel ,, 30, were appointed typists in December 1942 and May 1975 respectively. In 21 years, Fernando got two promotions, reaching the post of head typist in February 1963. Rachel, on the other hand, was promoted to head typist in November 1977 because she belonged to a scheduled tribe. Insult was added to injury when. a year later, she superseded the far older Farnando to the post of chief clerk

M Sampath, a scheduled caste candidate, joined as a signaller in the Villupuram junction of the Trichy division. Southern Railway. on 26 March 1974. Although the period of probation prescribed for the post of signallers is one year, and promotions are supposed to be on the basis of departmental tests, Sampath was promoted to the next grade. senior signaler, a mere 28 days later on 23 April 1974. He superseded K Chidambarathanu, who had been working as signaler since 1958. Many promotions of this kind have led to a deterioration in standards of safety in the railways. The railway accidents inquiry committee, 1968, headed by Justice KN Wan- choo, had categorically recommended that the Government should review the question of reservation of posts for SC/ST employees in the Railways in the context of safety standards prevailing then.

Little wonder, then, that the Tamil Nadu Oppressed People’s Movement has begun to attract so much attention and support. The movement’s leaders do not mince words when they say that the Gujarat anti-reservation agitation will sooner or later find echoes in other states. “That the Gujaratis, a mild people, had to resort to these methods in order to express their anger is very significant,” says Mrs Pillai. “Once again, the lead has come from Gujarat. Then it was Gandhi · who gave the signal, now it is the students.”

The ‘oppressed’ classes (they refer jocularly to themselves also as ‘depressed’ and ‘suppressed’) together represent one-third of Tamil Nadu’s population of 45 million. Out of 293 lakh voters, they number 98 lakhs. The TNOPM hopes to enlist a majority of these people. Although it disclaims political ambitions, it has a flag-yellow, with a five-point red star in the centre. In a lengthy document on reservations, the movement concludes: “There is a feeling of stifled rage among the forward castes which is bound to burst out all over India, with disastrous results. if the Government fails to see the writing on the wall.”

The Tamil Nadu Government, meanwhile, seems determined to rub salt in the forward castes’ wounds. Last fortnight, a Young World programme on Madras Doordarshan ended with the bright young compere announcing that free coaching for any degree would be provide to SC/ST students in all of the State’s colleges. If a minimum of 10 students were not available for each coaching class the shortfall would have to be made up by backward class students. Students were asked to get in touch with the principals of their colleges, or with the director of Harijan and Tribal Welfare in Madras.

This was not all. On 27 February Tamil Nadu’s Harijan Welfare Minister’ M Vijayasarathy informed the Legislative Council that the State Government was considering increasing the 18 per cent reservation for scheduled castes and tribes in employment and admission to educational institutions. The minister said a decision would be taken after the Supreme Court “disposed of” the writ petition challenging the increase in the reservation for backward classes from 31 per cent to 50 per cent. Is it surprising the forwards in Tamil Nadu are seeing red?