• Since 2002, the issue of sub-categorisation of Other Backward Classes (OBCs) within the larger caste grouping has been a heated issue, leading to political tensions, especially near the election period.
• There has been a stir in various states like Bihar, and Uttar Pradesh to study the caste dynamics and caste interplay which house a dominant OBC population.
• The priority is given to a caste census to determine the numerical standing of each caste group for better serving the people of India.

Other Backward Classes (OBCs)

• The expression ‘OBC’ was coined to denote backward/ marginalised communities and castes that were not Scheduled Castes (SCs) or Scheduled Tribes (STs).
• It is recognized that social backwardness in India has traditionally been a direct consequence of caste status and that other types of backwardness have flowed from this system.
• The Indian Constitution mandates affirmative action for OBCs under Article 15(4) and Article 16(4) to provide special provisions and reservations to uplift socially and educationally backward classes.
• Article 29 (2) states for non-discrimination with regard to admission into state educational institutions on grounds of religion, caste, etc.
• This shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any Socially and Educationally Backward Classes of citizens.

Further discrimination among OBCs

• OBCs have been generally identified on the basis of their occupation: cultivation of own land, tenant farming, agriculture labour, cattle-rearing, pottery, carpentry, blacksmith, oilseeds crushing, etc.
• Many castes among the OBCs are at different levels of marginalization by emergence of two broad categories within the OBCs- those who own land (like Yadavs and Kurmis in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh), and those who do not.
• The demand for reservation for the “backwards among OBCs” has increased owing to a few “upper” OBCs having grabbed most of the benefits of the 27% reservation.
• Reservation in India emerged through the implementation of the Mandal Commission recommendations more than 30 years ago (1990).

Impact of OBC classification

• The Bihar caste survey identified 27% of the population as backward, and 36% as Extremely Backward Classes, or EBCs).
• Based on this, two lists of OBCs were released by Bihar government in 1951, which was declared unconstitutional by the Patna High Court.
• The Mungeri Lal Commission (1970), named 128 “backward” communities, 94 of which were identified as “most backward”.
• Its recommendations were implemented through the Karpoori Thakur Formula and provided 26% reservation, under the categories OBC, economically backward classes among the OBCs, women got 3%, and the upper castes poor.
• The upper OBCs and backward OBCs (mainly artisan castes) were divided as BC-I, BC-II, and OBC Women.
• Like the EBCs, a category of “Mahadalits” has been identified among the Scheduled Castes.

Appointment of OBC Commissions

First OBC Commission

• The panel, headed by Kaka Kalelkar, was constituted by the government in 1953, and submitted its report in 1955.
• It adopted the following criteria to identify socially and educationally backward classes-
• Low social position in the traditional caste hierarchy of Hindu society;
• Lack of general educational advancement among the major section of the caste/ community;
• Inadequate or no representation in government service;
• Inadequate representation in trade, commerce and industry.
• This prepared a list of 2,399 backward castes or communities in the country, categorized 837 of them as “most backward”.
• It recommended for enumerating castes in the 1961 census, providing 25-40% reservation at different levels of government jobs, and 70% reservation for admission to technical and professional institutions.
• The report was never discussed in Parliament and never implemented as the government decided that any all-India list drawn up by the Central Government would have no practical utility.

Second OBC Commission

• The B P Mandal Commission was appointed in 1979 but its implementation was announced only in 1990 by the government.
• It identified 3,743 castes and communities as OBCs, estimated their population at 52%, and recommended 27% reservation in government jobs and admissions to all government-run scientific, technical, and professional institutions.
• No subcategories were recognized within the 27% OBC quota, but one of the members  recommended OBC split into intermediate backward classes and depressed backward classes.
• The government stated that within the 27% reservation for SEBCs, preference shall be given to candidates belonging to the poorer sections of the SEBCs.
• The quota has always been implemented by treating the entire OBC population as one block after excluding the “creamy layer” of affluent candidates on the basis of criteria fixed after a Supreme Court ruling under Indra Sawhney vs Union of India case,1992.
• If the income of parents is drawn from salaries or income from other sources (other than salaries and agricultural) and exceeds the limit of Rs. 2.5 lakh per annum for three consecutive years, theirs children shall be treated to fall in creamy layer.

Subcategories in states

• State governments have applied their own criteria to distribute quota benefits among the various categories of OBCs, before the Mandal recommendations were implemented at the Centre.
• Different states consider different sub- categories of division for OBCs like Aboriginal tribes, vimukt jatis, nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes, Professional group like tappers, weavers, carpenters, etc; SC who were converted to other religions, etc.
• Some states favoured caste census for better understanding of numerical strength and formulating planned welfare policies.
• The Social Justice Committee was appointed in Uttar Pradesh to subcategorize SCs and OBCs to provide quotas within quotas.
• The Hukum Singh Committee declared Yadavs as ‘forwards’ among backwards and ranked them more influential communities like Jats below them, and put Jatavs at the top among SCs.
• The report was challenged before the Supreme Court, which cancelled its implementation.
• The bid for sub-categorization aimed to cater land-owing OBCs who were deserted earlier and led shift of power to the backward and most backward castes.
• The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment has asked the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) to examine the matter of subcategorization of OBCs in the central list.
• NCBC headed by Justice V Eswaraiah, suggested that OBCs should be subcategorized into Extremely Backward Classes, More Backward Classes, and Backward Classes.
• The recommendation was not implemented and, a new commission was constituted in 2017, under Justice G Rohini, the recommendations of which are yet to be made public.

The enumeration of castes and sub-categorization OBCs would ensure equity in the distribution of reservation benefits, but may lead to deepening social inequalities among different stakeholders.