Editor's Pick: No data, no quota

The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down the 10.5% reservation quota to the Vanniyakula Kshatriya community in Tamil Nadu. The court said the quota violates the fundamental rights of equality, non-discrimination and equal opportunity of 115 other Most Backward Communities (MBC) and Denotified Communities (DNC). The total MBC quota in Tamil Nadu is 20%. Providing 10.5% within this to the Vanniyars alone and only 9.5% to the 115 communities was without “substantial basis”, the court held. On November 1 last year, the Madras High Court had also declared unconstitutional The Special Reservation Act of 2021, which was enacted by the previous AIADMK regime for the Vanniyars on account of their “extreme backwardness”. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision that the quota was based on “antiquated data”. While it held that there is “no bar to the sub-classification among backward classes”, the court said there was no assessment done before the Act to show that the Vanniyars are more backward than other MBCs and DNCs. The government’s justification for providing the quota to the Vanniyars was that the Second Backward Class Commission in 1983 had estimated the community to constitute 13.01% of the total population (although there was no consensus on this number even among the members of the Commission). Read K. Venkataramanan’s explainer of the reasons for the Madras High Court’s judgment here. The judgment, like the Madras High Court verdict, puts the spotlight on the lack of caste-related data in India. As the editorial on the Madras High Court judgment said, “Instead of looking for shortcuts to popularity, regimes in all States should focus on compiling credible data both on the backwardness of sections of society and their level of representation in public services and educational opportunities.” While there is demand for a Socio-Economic Caste Census, which, it is argued, would provide a rationale for reservation and pave the way for democratic policymaking, there has also been vehement opposition to it from many political parties. In this conversation, Professors Satish Deshpande and Valerian Rodrigues had discussed why a caste census is essential to document not only disadvantage but also to document privilege. The Supreme Court judgment has disappointed the S. Ramadoss-led Pattali Makkal Katchi, which had been at the forefront of this demand. But Dr. Ramadoss has also been quick to note that the apex court struck down six out of the seven grounds on which the High Court had quashed the law and has urged the Chief Minister to get the necessary report to pass the legislation. The demand for data on caste is an important, long-pending one and the judgment validates this. This is why this story is the top pick of the day. Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Head over to our newsletter subscription page to sign up for Editor‘s Pick and more. Click here The Hindu’s Editorials Cohesion and co-operation: On power imbalances in BIMSTEC Step by step: On Assam-Meghalaya border accord The Hindu’s Daily Quiz In the World Press Freedom Index of 2021, what was India’s rank among the 180 countries analysed? 152 148 142 150 To find out the answer and play the full quiz, click here [logo] Editor's Pick 01 APRIL 2022 [The Hindu logo] In the Editor's Pick newsletter, The Hindu explains why a story was important enough to be carried on the front page of today's edition of our newspaper. [Arrow]( [Open in browser]( [Mail icon]( [More newsletters]( No data, no quota The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down the 10.5% reservation quota to the Vanniyakula Kshatriya community in Tamil Nadu. The court said the quota violates the fundamental rights of equality, non-discrimination and equal opportunity of 115 other Most Backward Communities (MBC) and Denotified Communities (DNC). The total MBC quota in Tamil Nadu is 20%. Providing 10.5% within this to the Vanniyars alone and only 9.5% to the 115 communities was without “substantial basis”, the court held. On November 1 last year, the Madras High Court had also declared unconstitutional The Special Reservation Act of 2021, which was enacted by the previous AIADMK regime for the Vanniyars on account of their “extreme backwardness”. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision that the quota was based on “antiquated data”. While it held that there is “no bar to the sub-classification among backward classes”, the court said there was no assessment done before the Act to show that the Vanniyars are more backward than other MBCs and DNCs. The government’s justification for providing the quota to the Vanniyars was that the Second Backward Class Commission in 1983 had estimated the community to constitute 13.01% of the total population (although there was no consensus on this number even among the members of the Commission). [Read K. Venkataramanan’s explainer of the reasons for the Madras High Court’s judgment here.]( The judgment, like the Madras High Court verdict, puts the spotlight on the lack of caste-related data in India. As the [editorial on the Madras High Court judgment]( said, “Instead of looking for shortcuts to popularity, regimes in all States should focus on compiling credible data both on the backwardness of sections of society and their level of representation in public services and educational opportunities.” While there is demand for a Socio-Economic Caste Census, which, it is argued, would provide a rationale for reservation and pave the way for democratic policymaking, there has also been vehement opposition to it from many political parties. [In this conversation]( Professors Satish Deshpande and Valerian Rodrigues had discussed why a caste census is essential to document not only disadvantage but also to document privilege. The Supreme Court judgment has disappointed the S. Ramadoss-led Pattali Makkal Katchi, which had been at the forefront of this demand. But Dr. Ramadoss has also been quick to note that the apex court struck down six out of the seven grounds on which the High Court had quashed the law and has urged the Chief Minister to get the necessary report to pass the legislation. The demand for data on caste is an important, long-pending one and the judgment validates this. This is why this story is the top pick of the day. Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Head over to our newsletter subscription page to sign up for Editor‘s Pick and more.  [Click here]( The Hindu’s Editorials [Arrow][Cohesion and co-operation: On power imbalances in BIMSTEC]( [Arrow][Step by step: On Assam-Meghalaya border accord]( The Hindu’s Daily Quiz In the World Press Freedom Index of 2021, what was India’s rank among the 180 countries analysed? - 152 - 148 - 142 - 150 To find out the answer and play the full quiz, [click here]( Today’s Best Reads [[Is the fuel pricing policy problematic? | The Hindu Parley podcast] Is the fuel pricing policy problematic? | The Hindu Parley podcast]( [[Sci-Five | The Hindu Science Quiz] Sci-Five | The Hindu Science Quiz]( [[Unmarried daughter can claim marriage expenses from parents: Chhattisgarh High Court] Unmarried daughter can claim marriage expenses from parents: Chhattisgarh High Court]( [[Chilika lake’s dolphin population falls] Chilika lake’s dolphin population falls]( Copyright @ 2022, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. If you are facing any trouble in viewing this newsletter, please [try here]( If you do not wish to receive such emails [go here](