http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Myth_Of_Caste_Division/articleshow/1925776.cms


Myth Of Caste Division
P V Indiresan
[20 Apr, 2007 l 0000 hrs IST]

  As one would expect from a person of his judicial background, Rajindar Sachar 
made a dispassionate analysis of the problem of the OBC reservation issue 
(April 16, 2007). 
  However, not having direct experience of the education system, he cannot know 
the ground realities. Hence, his conclusions need some modifications. 
   
  Even though it is more than likely that the proportion of the OBC population 
is in excess of the 27 per cent quota proposed by the government, the court has 
decided to proceed with caution. 
   
  That caution is necessary on two grounds: One, it is important to decide who 
the OBCs are today and not who they were 75 years ago. 
   
  Two, it is necessary to check whether backwardness of OBCs in 2007 is the 
result of 5,000 years of tradition, or whether it is a creation of 50 years of 
education (mis)management? 
   
  The Planning Commission's Approach Paper to the Eleventh Five Year Plan 
states: "Thirty per cent (of primary school teachers) had not even completed 
Higher Secondary. For a large proportion of our children, school is an ill-lit 
class room with more than one class being taught together by someone who may 
not have completed her own schooling... 38 per cent of the children who have 
completed four years cannot read a small paragraph with short sentences meant 
to be read by a student of Class II. About 55 per cent cannot divide a three 
digit number by a one digit number... often the need for children of poorer 
families to work also drives them away from school. The monitoring above will 
need to correlate such facts with learning skills to identify where the real 
problems lie". 
   
  Thus, the government's own top policy body supports the view taken by the 
court for objective analysis and contradicts the stand taken by the HRD 
ministry. 
   
  The Approach Paper continues: "Even where service providers exist, the 
quality of delivery is poor and those responsible for delivering the services 
cannot be held accountable. Unless such accountability is established, it will 
be difficult to ensure significant improvement in delivery even if additional 
resources are made available". 
   
  Reacting to this statement, finance minister P Chidambaram has written: "It 
can be argued that you do not repair a leaking water supply pipe by 
simultaneously stepping up the water pressure". 
   
  Thus, at the highest levels of government there are deep concerns about 
accountability and about the acts of omission and commission of the HRD 
ministry that have led to the current poor performance of the education sector. 
   
  Whatever the finance minister may say in public, it is evident that he too is 
not convinced about increasing the pressure of prevailing policies which are 
leaking all over the place. 
   
  Inclusion is the fashionable expression these days; it has attained the 
status of moral imperative. Inclusion is the policy by which the HRD ministry 
swears by. The actual ground situation is different. 
   
  The Approach Paper observes that "relatively better off sections have 
virtually stopped sending their children to public schools". 
   
  According to a World Bank report, the share of unaided schools in secondary 
education has increased from 5.59 per cent in 1973-74 to 23.56 per cent in 
2001-02. Currently, the proportion will be much higher. 

Thus the poor quality education that the Approach Paper complains about is 
largely confined to government controlled schools; the better off sections have 
escaped the malaise by opting out of government and government-aided schools. 

In effect, the poor and the poor alone have been excluded from acceptable 
quality education. Is this exclusion the result of age-old caste tradition or 
is it the result of political failure of recent decades? 

That enquiry is moot because most chief ministers and almost all education 
ministers are OBCs. Therefore, the ground situation is quite different from the 
caste divide painted by the HRD ministry. 

Before Independence, in many parts of the country, OBCs controlled land and 
forward castes concentrated on educated employment. 

Income from land has dwindled and the OBCs are seeking to take over the 
economic space that was occupied by forward castes. 

Is the difficulty that the OBCs are having to make that transition due to 
obstruction from forward castes, or is it due to administrative failures that 
neglect education of poor children? 

In the case of higher education, the Approach Paper has set three goals: 
expansion, inclusion and excellence. 

It is pertinent to ask whether excellence can be achieved at the higher 
education level when there is no excellence at the lower school levels; whether 
12 years of bad schooling can be corrected merely by privileged entry into 
higher education institutions. 

It is politically fashionable these days to paint forward castes as amoral and 
anti-social. The Supreme Court may like to consider enquiring how far this 
allegation is true. 

In the Mahabharata, Yudhishthira begs for five villages for himself and his 
brothers. The Kauravas rejected even that modest request on legalist grounds. 
Is not the current situation similar? 

Is it not the fact that the political class is rejecting a modest request that 
at least a few IITs and IIMs be left free to pursue excellence, not exclusively 
for forward castes but for one and all and without caste bias? 

Finally, which is the true divide: Forward-backward castes or is it politically 
over-privileged castes (POPs) and politically under-privileged castes (PUPs)? 

Reply via email to