There is a sect within the Brahmin community called Soundi Brahmins. They are one of the most ostracized and marginalized communities in Tamil Nadu as they perform the last rites for the departed. They live on the verges of poverty and literally survive on death.

But they come under the General Category or the so-called “Forward Caste” as they come under the larger umbrella of the Brahmin community.

Consider a hypothetical situation where a student belonging to this community manages to get a good score in a competitive exam but that score falls short of the General Category cut-off. On the other hand, there is another student belonging to the Other Backward Class (OBC) community, whose father is a Central government employee and mother a state government school principal, who has scored less than the Soundi Brahmin student but has crossed the cut-off of OBC.

The OBC student will get a seat through the OBC quota. But the reservation scheme that was present until now would deny the opportunity to the Soundi Brahmin student. Since that community neither has any voice nor has the ability to organize itself, they wear it as their fate and get on with their lives picking charred bones from the funeral pyre so that their kitchen stoves can be lit.

Reservation: A Tool Of Representation Or Affirmative Action?

Reservation is absolutely necessary for the underprivileged communities who for generations did not have access to education and employment opportunities.

At the same time, it is important that financial incapacity does not hamper the prospects of meritorious candidates.

Critics of the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) quota say that reservation is not a poverty alleviation programme but a constitutional tool to provide representation to the historically disadvantaged communities. But reservation shouldn’t be seen just as a tool of representation.

Reservation is affirmative action which means that the state is obliged to support any person who is disadvantaged – socially, educationally, or economically.

For the historically socially and educationally backward classes, there is a provision of reservation that will allow them to climb up the socio-economic ladder.

However, the economically backward unrepresented communities have hitherto had no provision to get state support.

The EWS quota would be a boon to the financially disadvantaged like the Soundi Brahmins who cannot get benefits under the existing reservation scheme.

Bringing About Real Social Justice

Tamil Nadu has a long history of rejecting quotas based on economic criteria.

The invincible MGR himself had to give up his idea of reservation based on economic criteria after he suffered a crushing defeat in the 1980 Lok Sabha elections. He later increased the quota for Backward Classes (BC) from 31% to 50% taking the total reservation pie to 69% that secured him a thumping win in the following Assembly Elections. The 69% reservation was later brought under the 9th Schedule of the Constitution by late AIADMK supremo Jayalalithaa making it sacrosanct.

Nobody has ever even thought of extending reservation based on economic criteria. Despite the issue gaining credence at the national level, the then Congress-led UPA government put the issue in the back burner by forming the Sinho Commission.

It was only in 2019 that the BJP-led NDA had the political will and brought in the Constitution (One Hundred and Third Amendment) Act that introduced 10% for economically weaker sections. All political parties except the DMK and its allies have supported the historical decision. Only the BJP, Dr. Krishnasamy’s Puthiya Tamilagam, John Pandian’s Tamilaga Makkal Munnetra Kazhagam, and GK Vasan’s Tamil Maanila Congress have come out in support of 10% EWS reservation in Tamil Nadu.

The Congress as usual is confused with its local leadership in Tamil Nadu defying the stance of national leadership.

But the recent Supreme Court ruling upholding the constitutional validity of the 10% quota for economically weaker sections has dealt a blow to Dravidian parties and their local allies in Tamil Nadu.

Parties such as the DMK, VCK, PMK, and other fringe outfits such as the NTK and MDMK spread lies and misinformation that EWS quota will benefit only Brahmins who comprise less than 3% of the state population. These parties question why they (Brahmins) require reservation when they are already socially and educationally forward.

Contrary to the popular perception created by Dravidian Stockists and a section of the Tamil media that only Brahmins will benefit, the 10% quota for economically weaker sections (EWS) will benefit around 79 castes in Tamil Nadu, including a section of Christians and Muslims.

Here is a list of communities, that will benefit out of EWS – Arcot Mudaliar, Vellala Mudaliar, Sivachariyar, Odhuvar, Chettiyar, Vellalars, Balija Naidu, Reddiyar, Adi Saiva, Veera Saiva, Anglo Indians, 6 Christian communities Roman Catholic Christians, Upper Caste Christian Converts, and around 10 Muslims communities like Dawood, Mir, Lebbai, Rawther, etc.

The Dravidian Model Of Fradulent Social Justice

Many of the DMK Ministers and senior leaders themselves belong to the communities that will benefit out of EWS – PTR Palanivel Thiagarajan (Thondai Mandala Vellalar), KN Nehru (Reddiyar), KKSSR Ramachandran (Reddiyar), P. Sekarbabu (Kammavar), RS Bharathi (Mudaliar) to name a few.

But the party has been opposing the EWS tooth and nail. In fact, many belonging to the above mentioned castes are unhappy about this blind opposition to EWS as they feel that the DMK is trying to deny reservation for their community.

An anecdotal reference notes that members of these communities who fall under general category are being asked to get BC/MBC certificate by mentioning a similar caste.

For example, there are many Naidu castes – Kamma Naidu, Balija Naidu, Gavara Naidu and so on. While Kammavar or Kamma Naidu and Balija Naidu fall under General Category, they are being asked to mention themselves as Gavara Naidu and get BC certificate to get reservation benefits. This ubiquitous fraud that has been normalized is what is the Dravidian Model of social justice.

By opposing the EWS quota, the DMK and its allies are not only denying the reservation benefits to the financially disadvantaged in General Category but is also denying genuine OBC candidates who need reservation.

Are The So-Called Backward Really Backward?

During the Nayakkar rule of what is now known as Tamil Nadu, the entire region was divided into Palayams and ruled by Palayakkars. There were Palayakkar rulers from various Tamil castes. For example, Maravars, who features in the current MBC list of the Tamil Nadu government, ruled Palayams in and around Sivagangai regions. Among the notable Maravars who ruled the Palayams in the Sivagangai regions were Rani Velu Nachiar, Singampatti Jameendhar, Kadambur Jameendhars, and others.

So, why should a ruling class like the Maravars be granted reservation, especially under the Most Backward Class (MBC) category? Members of this caste are proud to claim that they were once the ruling class. How can they be considered socially backward class for reservation if they were the ruling class?

Maravars are not the only ones who claim to be the ruling class while enjoying reservation benefits intended for socially backward classes.

MBC communities also includes the Kambalathu Nayakkars and Thottiya Nayakkars castes, who were once the Palayakkars of Nilakottai and Ettayapuram Palayams. Kattabomman is a well-known ruler from this caste.

Vanniyars who identify themselves as Cholas, Pallavas, or Agni Kula Kshatriyas are also included in the MBC category. Nadars, who was once hailed by late Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalitha as the descendants of Chera, Chozha, and Pandyas, are also given Backward Class (BC) reservation.

Barghava Kula Udayar caste, who claim that they have had matrimonial alliances with Chozhas were also given BC reservations. BC reservation is given to Agamudayars, who claim to be the royal descendants of Maruthu Pandiars (Maruthu Brothers). Muthraiyars and Gounders, who claim to be the descendants of Perumbidugu Mutharaiyar and Theeran Chinnamalai king respectively, are also granted BC status. Kallars and Vaandayars, once the ruling class, also enjoy BC status in Tamil Nadu.

When these ruling classes are given reservation in Tamil Nadu, why shouldn’t it be given to the 79 classes mentioned in the General Category in Tamil Nadu? It should be noted that Muslims who ruled India for 700 years are given a special reservation under the category BCM (BC Muslims) in Tamil Nadu.

Can Income Be Made A Criterion For State Support?

It is worth noting that the parties like DMK, VCK, PMK, and others that advocated for raising the OBC Non-Creamy layer annual income ceiling to ₹25 lakhs are opposing the ₹8 lakhs ceiling set for the EWS category.

Though parties, such as the DMK, are opposed to income-based EWS reservations, Tamil Nadu has used income as a criterion in many affirmative action policies. Understanding them and their implications have become critical for evidence-based reservation policy.

In Tamil Nadu, many affirmative action policies choose beneficiaries based not only on caste and religion but also on income. For example, religious minorities, Backward Classes (BC), Most Backward Classes (MBC), and Denotified Communities (DC) are all eligible for pre-matriculation scholarships. The annual scholarship amount ranges from ₹200 for MBCs and BCs to ₹10,000 for religious minorities. The scholarship criteria vary as well: for BCs and religious minorities, it is restricted to beneficiaries whose parents’ income is less than ₹1 lakh. There are no such conditions in the MBC or DC.

However, under the post-matric scholarship policy, religious minorities can receive an annual scholarship of up to ₹13,800 per year, provided that the beneficiary’s parents’ annual income (from all sources) does not exceed ₹2 lakh. The post-matric scholarship for BCs and MBCs is ₹500 per year, but the income limit for parents is stricter — it cannot exceed ₹1 lakh.

Disadvantaged Groups (DG) and Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) are entitled to 25% of seats in private non-minority schools under the “Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act” . Thus, 1.08 lakh seats in Tamil Nadu are set aside for beneficiaries and are provided at no cost. Tamil Nadu has set a ₹2 lakh annual family income cap as the eligibility requirement for EWS seats, irrespective of community.

Using income as a criterion is clearly well established in reservation policy. Because government resources are limited, using a benchmark of family income helps select those who are most deserving of assistance. This is especially important in a state like Tamil Nadu, where OBCs make up 76% of the population, SCs 20%, and STs 1%.

It is critical to comprehend the implications and actual outcomes of these various reservation policies at the caste and community levels. Consistent data collection and evidence-building of reservation policies would ensure the successful achievement of social justice goals.

The government has set the ₹8 lakh income limit for EWS based on the same criteria used for determining OBC creamy layer.

EWS Quota: A Step Towards Discrimination-Less Society

EWS quota is not just about providing support to the economically weaker sections. The EWS quota will also help break the stigma associated with reservations as reservation has always been related with caste and a section of the people look down upon those who come through quota.Thus, the EWS quota is also a progressive step towards a caste discrimination-less society.

The EWS quota is the last piece in the puzzle to make way for a truly just reservation system that recognizes merit as well as representation.

Click here to subscribe to The Commune on Telegram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post EWS Reservation: The Antidote To The Fradulent Dravidian Model Of Social Justice appeared first on The Commune.

While hearing a slew of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the 103rd amendment to the Constitution, the Supreme Court on Monday ruled that reservation on economic grounds does not violate the essential features of the Indian Constitution.

The 103rd amendment to the constitution provided for a 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in admission to educational institutions and government jobs.

The judgement was delivered by a five-judge Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice UU Lalit. While Justices Dinesh Maheshwari, Bela M Trivedi, and JB Pardiwala ruled in favor of the EWS quota, Chief Justice UU Lalit and Justice S Ravindra Bhat dissented. “EWS reservation does not violate the equality code or violate essential features of the constitution and breach of 50% does not violate basic structure as the ceiling limit is here only for 16(4) and (5). Reservation on an economic basis does not violate the basic structure or Constitution of India.” Justice Dinesh Maheshwari said in reading out the order.

While agreeing with Justice Maheshwari, Justice Bela M Trivedi stated, “The quota must be treated as affirmative action by the Parliament.” There is no violation of Article 14 or the basic structure of the constitution. The EWS quota does not affect the rights of reserved classes by exempting them from its purview. The reservation was brought in to address inequalities created by the caste system. After 75 years, we need to revisit policy to live up to the philosophy of transformative constitutionalism.”

Justice JB Pardiwala, who was in favor of upholding the EWS quota, said, “The reservation is not an end, but means to secure social and economic justice. It must not be allowed to become a vested interest. The reservation should not continue for an indefinite period of time so as to become vested interested.”

While dissenting from the aforementioned judges’ judgement, Justice Bhat stated, “Amendment practices constitutionally prohibited discrimination and strikes at the heart of the quality code.” Allowing a breach of the 50% reservation cap can lead to further infractions, which can result in compartmentalization.”

Chief Justice Lalit agreed with Justice Bhat’s point of view, resulting in a 3-2 judgement.

This has been a setback for Tamil Nadu parties such as the DMK, CPI, VCK, PMK, MDMK, and the Makkal Needhi Maiam, who filed a counter-affidavit in the Supreme Court seeking an order against the 10% EWS quota.

(with inputs from Indian Express)

Click here to subscribe to The Commune on Telegram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post SC Upholds Constitutional Validity Of EWS Quota By 3:2 Majority: Victory For Centre, Setback For DMK appeared first on The Commune.

The Tamil Nadu government has withdrawn the circular dated June 4, 2020 that directed the District Collectors to instruct the tehsildars to stop issuance of income and assets certificates for EWS quota.

The move comes in response to the petition filed against the government’s move at the Madras High Court by All India Brahmin Association and Reddy Sangha.

The petition was filed by T.P Kulathumani, President of Akhil Bharatiya Brahmin Association and advocate G. Girubakaran who is an executive member of Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Pondicherry Reddy Nala Sangam.

Advocate General Vijay Narayan submitted that the matter will now be referred to a group of ministers who will now take policy decision on the same which will be conveyed to the court.

The advocate general representing the state government submitted before the court that the erstwhile Revenue Commissioner had issued the circular without consulting the government. He said that the current Revenue Commissioner has withdrawn the circular after consulting the government.

The matter is currently under the purview of the group of ministers who will take a policy decision and the court will be apprised of the same. The case is due for hearing on July 13.

Source: The New Indian Express

The post TN Govt withdraws circular directing Tehsildars to stop issuance of income and assets certificates appeared first on The Commune.

On June 4, 2020, a circular was issued by Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Revenue Administration J. Radhakrishnan IAS to all District Collectors of Tamil Nadu asking them to instruct the Tahsildars to not issue income and asset certificate for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) either through online or manually.

A petition was filed at the Chennai High Court to revoke this circular that gave no reason for stopping the issuance of income and asset certificate. The petition came up for hearing before Justice Subbiah and Krishnan Ramaswamy.

Chennai High Court had ordered the Tamil Nadu government to respond by June 30 as to why the issuance of the certificates has been suspended.

In light of this, the Tamil Nadu government has said that it has now constituted a ministerial committee to look into the matter and decide.

The court has now adjourned the hearing to July 11.

The post TN Govt responds to petition against its move to stop issuance of income and assets certificate for EWS quota appeared first on The Commune.

On June 4, 2020, a circular was issued by Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Revenue Administration J. Radhakrishnan IAS to all District Collectors of Tamil Nadu asking them to instruct the Tahsildars to not issue income and asset certificate for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) either through online or manually. This missed grabbing the headlines as the mainstream media didn’t pay much attention. However, it did create a small ripple in social media with many questioning and speculating the intentions behind the move by the AIADMK government. It was seen as an attempt to pander to the OBC vote bank considering that elections are due next year. What is the truth behind this move? To understand, we need to connect some dots.

The dots

Dot 1: On April 20 of this year as the Wuhan virus was stretching its tentacles leading to a nation-wide lockdown that has been in force since March 24, DMK President under the advice of Prashant Kishor the head of Indian Political Action Committee (IPAC) announced a scheme called ‘Ondrinaivom Vaa’ (Let’s Come Together). Through this propaganda initiative the party was to reach out to the needy and support them with food, essentials and cash.

Dot 2: On May 5, there was an incident reported in Kanyakumari that did not make much noise. Selvakumar, a former English teacher from Osaravillai who served as the Kulasekarapuram village panchayat vice president near Suseendhiram was reportedly going house by house collecting copies of identity documents like Aadhar card, ration card, etc along with photos, phone numbers and other details. Selvakumar is a DMK office bearer.

Dot 3: DMK MPs Dayanidhi Maran and TR Baalu along with Tamizhachi Thangapandian and Kalanidhi Veerasamy had met Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary K. Shanmugam on May 13 to submit the petitions received under DMK’s propaganda banner “Ondrinaivom Vaa”. It was claimed that they had submitted close to a lakh petitions to the Chief Secretary. The Chief Secretary had immediately sent these petitions to the CM Special Cell that was later segregated department wise and sent it to the respective departments and districts. Tamil Nadu Food Minister R Kamaraj had said that most of the petitions submitted under Ondrinaivom Vaa were fake petitions. Some of them turned out to be complaints of civic issues and had nothing to do with COVID or lockdown relief.

Dot 4: On May 29, MK Stalin submitted a second batch of more than 6.2 lakh petitions claimed to have received under Ondrinaivom Vaa to the CM office. He also claimed that 15 lakh distress calls were received on Ondrinaivom Vaa’s number 90730 90730 which were addressed by DMK office bearers at the block and district levels.

Dot 5: Meanwhile, it was observed that across districts, there was an increase in number of people applying and getting income and assets certificate to be listed under EWS.

Connecting the dots

In the name of reaching out to the needy and the economically weaker sections, the DMK and the IPAC went about collecting data like phone number, Aadhar card, address, number of people in a family, number of voters, and other details from lakhs of people. Simultaneously, it was found that there was rising number of income and assets certificate issued across districts. Most of these applications were filed by those who did not qualify for EWS criteria which is – those not belonging to SC/ST/OBC, those families having an annual income of less than 8 lakhs, those having a residential flat area of less than 1000 sq. ft, those now owning more than 5 acres agricultural land, etc). It seems that the DMK had collected details of these families and urged them to apply for EWS certificates as part of developing their vote bank.

Assuming that 1 petition consists of details about an individual and his/her family members, if one were to add up the data – 15 lakh phone calls made to 90730 90730, the 6.2 lakh petitions and the 1 lakh petitions – this would amount to information of 22.2 lakh families of Tamil Nadu. Accounting for duplications, petitions by own party men, etc. we can safely say that details of atleast 15 lakh families and their votes are now with the DMK and IPAC. Assuming that each family has 4 votes, it would mean that the DMK and IPAC now have personal details of 60 lakh voters of Tamil Nadu out of which we can say that 50% (30 lakhs) could be new voters. This data bank is now a plausible vote bank.

Prashant Kishor and his IPAC team are known for playing around with data to chart out election strategies for political parties. It is to be noted that in the 2016 Assembly elections, the difference between valid votes obtained by ADMK and DMK was approximately 39.47 lakhs. The DMK alliance that had put up a stellar performance in the Lok Sabha elections did not fare as expected in the by-elections and the local body elections that followed. Through the Ondrinaivom Vaa banner, they have harvested information of approximately 60 lakh voters (a modest estimate) for targeted political advertising, similar to what Cambridge Analytica did in the 2016 American Presidential elections.

It is in light of this behind-the-screen activities of Ondrinaivom Vaa, that the ADMK government issued a circular on June 4 to stop issuing income and assets certificates.

Inputs taken from Chanakyaa. 

The post Truth behind EWS certificate in TN: PK, DMK, and Ondrinaivom Vaa appeared first on The Commune.

A picture of a letter addressed to all District Collectors of Tamil Nadu has surfaced on social media that asks District Collectors to instruct Tahsildars to not issue income and asset certificate for Economically Weaker Sectrions (EWS) either through online or manually.

The letter dated June 4, 2020 issued by Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Revenue Administration to all District Collectors of Tamil Nadu and the Tamil Nadu e-Governance Agency states “As per instructions of the Government in the reference 4^th cited above, the circular and letter issued by this office in reference vide 1 and 3 is hereby withdrawn. Kindly instruct your Tahsildars not to issue the income and asset certificate for Economic Weaker Sections either through online or manually”.

The circular Lr.No. RA 5 (3) /40521/ 2017 dated May 4, 2019 gives the instructions for issuance of income and asset certificate for EWS.

This circular has now been withdrawn according to the latest letter issued to all the District Collectors.

The post Is TN Govt denying income certificate for EWS? appeared first on The Commune.