NEW DELHI: Two cabinet ministers – Chirag Paswan and Jitan Ram Manjhi – in the Narendra Modi-led government sparred over the issue of reservation on Saturday and sought each other’s resignation.The controversy began after Hindustani Awam Morcha (Secular) president and Union minister Jitan Ram Manjhi’s son, Santosh Kumar Suman, sought a review of the quota policy, backing the sub-categorisation of the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and the Scheduled Tribes (STs) in the reservation regime.“I think the purpose of reservation has not been served. The concept of creating the Mahadalit category with 18 of the 22 Dalit caste groups has been defeated due to the wide gap among the beneficiaries. The Extremely Backward Classes (EBC) category was created out of the other backward castes (OBCs), and the same was true for the concept of economically weaker sections (EWS) among the upper castes,” Suman had said.“How can it be wrong to ask which sections have benefited from reservation and to what extent, and which people standing at the very bottom of the social ladder remain deprived of it? Why is no DM or SP from the Musahar community, which has 4 percent population in Bihar? A comparative study is needed. Why will one section get 8 percent and another 80 percent among the beneficiaries?” he added.Chirag counters HAMThe remarks, however, did not sit well with another NDA ally, Chirag Paswan. The Union minister of food processing industries said that if Manjhi and his son want sub-quotas and a creamy layer within SC reservation, then the Union minister should resign.“People ask, ‘Why isn’t there a ‘creamy layer’ provision?’ Well, let them give it up, then – let them stop availing the benefits of reservation,” Chirag said.“If Jitan Ram Manjhi feels these measures should be implemented, should he not resign first? Let him introduce the ‘creamy layer’ concept – after all, he would fall under that category too, wouldn’t he? He should resign, and his son – who is present here – should resign as well,” he added.He also asserted that the basis of reservation lies in social factors and discussing it from an economic perspective “goes against the Constitution.”“The basis is social – specifically, the issue of untouchability within society,” he said.How Manjhi respondedLater in the day, Jitan Ram Manjhi slammed his cabinet colleague, accusing him of not caring about poor people.“People will end up being deprived of the benefits of reservation because of this stance. However, we maintain that this division is essential in the broader public interest.“Since he (Chirag) does not want to look after the interests of our poor people, he should resign,” he added.SC-ST quota rowThe controversy stems from a 2024 Supreme Court judgment that allowed states to sub-classify Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) to ensure that the benefits of reservation reach the more backward groups within these categories.
Share your thoughts in the comments
Be respectful · TOI community guidelines
It also asked governments to devise suitable criteria to bar the ‘creamy layer’ among SCs and STs from availing reservation.The Centre, however, told the Supreme Court in an affidavit that the creamy layer principle cannot be extended to SCs and STs. It said the principle currently applies only to Other Backward Classes (OBCs).“It has nowhere specifically been held that the principle of creamy layer is applicable to SCs and STs. The reference made to the concept of creamy layer… appears to be the general observation with regard to reservation in respect of OBCs (Other Backward Classes)/SEBCs (Socially and Educationally Backward Classes).”
Leave a Reply