Quota crutches

The Tribune, New Delhi , March 27, 2012

Quota crutches

I endorse DR Chaudhry’s views in the article, “Reservation stir in Haryana” (March 23) that reservation was meant for a period of 10 years, hoping that deprived sections would climb up the social ladder and would no longer be in need of a quota crutch”.

The founding fathers’ vision of reservation policy was like that of the crutches lent to a limbless person until his limbs grow up and he stands on his own legs The time has come at such a pass, paradoxically, where we see that the erstwhile limbless person, now having fully-grown limbs, does not want to let go off the borrowed crutches, and the inherently able-bodied person has also started clamouring for the crutches.

It is time now to gradually phase out reservations. The concept of creamy layer in the SC/ST should be introduced. The income from any other source including salaries should be included while computing annual income.

Other modalities of affirmative action like financial help in the form of various scholarships, fee reimbursements, dedicated training programmes etc should be stressed on.

Some other criteria in addition to caste factor for entitlement to reservation should be put in place.

Dr RAJENDER GOYAL, Delhi

Divine merchants

THE TRIBUNE, NEW DELHI, MAY 10, 2012

Divine merchants

Godmen and religious gurus like Nirmal Baba and Dinakaran Paul being exposed is the proverbial tip of an iceberg. The grim situation has built a strong aversion to self-styled godmen, astrologers, palmists, numerologists, sooth-sayers and other cognate persons and entities working in innumerable forms. These uncouth people perpetrate a very subtle, systemic, insidious design among unsuspecting, credulous, gullible and feeble-minded persons or those who are rapacious and desperate for worldly attainments.

The scourge is deep-seated and widespread. It calls for well-concerted and incessant endeavors from the rationalists. Superstition in any form and style is anathema to human dignity and existence.

Dr RAJENDER GOYAL, Bahadurgarh

RESERVATION EMBROGLIO

                                            THE TRIBUNE, MAY 04, 2012

Jats vs non-Jats

After Haryana was formed in November 1966, for most of the time the Chief Minister of the state is from the Jat community. Intermittently, if there have been non-Jat Chief Ministers, they were either a protégé of some powerful Jat leader of the time or seen hankering after Jat support for political survival. It bears testimony to the political clout of Jats in Haryana. Hence, it sounds quite queasy to hear the shrieks of demand for reservation from within the Jat community.

The common refrain of the protagonists of the Jat reservation is that some other peasantry castes in Haryana are already enjoying benefits of reservation, then why not Jats? Two wrongs do not make a right, they constitute a blunder. The remedy lies in denotifying and dis-entitling any such caste from reaping the fruits of reservation, if after an objective appraisal found that they do not qualify for it.

We must be alive to the hard fact that reservation is a state's charity and it is highly unbecoming of any self-respecting person to live of anybody’s alms unless physically handicapped.

Dr Rajender Goyal, Delhi


PS CAVEAT:- I have been misquoted by News Paper The Tribune in certain material aspects:-

1. I never entitled my write up as “Jats vs non-jats as published. Rather the write up  I had sent was entitled as  “RESERVATION EMBROGLIO”.
2. The words “Unless physically handcapped” in the last line are the  concoction of the News paper in the guise of necessary editing. I had used the expression "Be that as it may be, we must be alive to the hard fact that reservation is a state's charity and it is highly unbecoming of any self-respecting person to live off anybody’s alms unless it is not at all possible to stand on one's own legs due to some insurmountable present or historical reasons".  

                It is crystal clear that expression "due to some insurmountable present or historical reasons" enables the extension of the reservation benefits not only to the physically handicapped persons but also to SC/ST/BC/OBC/Widows/victims of riots and natural calamities etc in genuine cases.


The original write up sent to the Tribune reads as follows:-

                    RESERVATION EMBROGLIO

Apropos the News report “Consensus on no reservation to Jat community”, (April 30, 2012), I would like to add that the Founding Fathers’ vision of reservation policy was like that of the crutches lent to a limbless person until his limbs grow up and he stands on his own legs. The time has come at such a pass, paradoxically, where we see that the erstwhile limbless person, now having fully grown-up limbs, does not want to let go of the borrowed crutches, and the inherently able-bodied person has also started clamouring for the crutches.
The political power is the magnet that attracts all other coveted temporal attributes like money, strength, status, recognition etc. in tow. In the context of jat agitation for reservation, we must know that after the formation of Haryana in November 1966, for most of the time, the Chief Minister of the state is from jat community. Intermittently, if there have been non-jat Chief Ministers, they were either a protégé of some powerful jat leader of the time or seen hankering after jat supports for survival. It bears out the pre-eminent position and stout political clout of jats in Haryana. Hence, it sounds quite queasy to hear the shrieks of demand for reservation from with in the jat community.
               The quota based reservation policy a part of the affirmative action was aimed as a tool of egalitarianism. It now stands catapulted as a prized booty. To grab upon reservation- one has to engage with the state and take casualties. The fumes billowed out of Gujjar agitation in Rajasthan have hardly died down, now jats are up in the arms in Haryana demanding reservation and guess who can be the next? Obviously only those daredevils who can muster up enough strength to block national highways, vandalise the public and private property, jeopardize others’ lives, chase away the police and security personnel, sacrifice precious lives at the altar of reservation cauldron and above the all, enjoy overt or covert political patronage from either side of the fence! The common refrain of the protagonists of the jat reservation is that some other peasantry castes in Haryana already enjoy the benefits of the reservation, then, why jat should not be? It must be brought home to them that two wrongs do not make a right, they constitute a plumb blunder. The remedy lies in denotifying and disentitling any of such castes to reap the fruits of the reservation, if after an objective appraisal, found that they do not qualify for it.
               Be that as it may be, we must be alive to the hard fact that reservation is a state's charity and it is highly unbecoming of any self-respecting person to live off anybody’s alms unless it is not at all possible to stand on one's own legs due to some insurmountable present or historical reasons. We should shun the path of confrontation and violence, and pledge to dedicate ourselves in the mission of nation-building to find our Country in the league of the developed countries in the next two decade.

Dr RAJENDER GOYAL, Visiting Faculty (Law)

CPJ College of Higher Studies and School of Law, Delhi

Stand-off between Private School Owners and Haryana Government over free Education to Students Belonging to Poor Families

There is a stiff stand-off between private schools owners and Haryana Government on the issue of provision of free education to the students belonging to poor families. The controversy hovers around the Rule 134A of Haryana Education Rules, 2003. and hence, it becomes imperative to put it in correct perspective.
Rule 134A added vide notification No. S.O.3/H.A.12/1999/S.24/ 2007 dated: 19-01-2007 sets out that “the recognized private schools shall reserve 25% seats for meritorious poor students. The school shall charge fee from these students at the rate as charged in Government schools. The deficit of difference of fee shall be charged from the other students of the school”. It is noteworthy that the said rule 134A was again amended in the year 2009 vide notification No S.O.24/H.A.12/1999/S.24 (1)/ 2009 dated: 21-02-2009 to the effect that “the recognized private schools shall reserve 25% seats for meritorious poor students. The school shall charge fee from these students at the rate as charged in Government schools”.
Hence, it is unequivocally clear that after the amendment of 2009 in Rule 134, no burden shall shift on the other students (i.e. remaining 75% students) for the recovery of deficit of difference of fee. Moreover, section 12(2) of the RTE Act, 2009 mandates that the private unaided school providing free and compulsory elementary education shall be reimbursed expenditure so incurred by it to the extent of per-child-expenditure incurred by the State, or the actual amount charged from the child, whichever is less, in such manner as may be prescribed provided that such reimbursement shall not exceed per-child-expenditure incurred by a government school provided further that where such school is already under obligation to provide free education to a specified number of children on account of it having received any land, building, equipment or other facilities, either free of cost or at a concessional rate, such school shall not be entitled for reimbursement to the extent of such obligation. Furthermore, under the Act vide section12 (1) (c) private unaided Schools are under an obligation to admit in class I only, to the extent of at least twenty-five per cent of the strength of that class, children belonging to weaker section and disadvantaged group in the neighbourhood and provide free and compulsory elementary education till its completion.
Thus, neither extant Rule 134A of Haryana Education Rule, 2003 as amended in the year 2009 is prejudicial to the interest of the students of well-off family as it does not shift any financial burden on them nor the RTE Act, 2009 obligates the private school to make the provision for 25% quota for admission all across the board other than Class1. However, to keep up the financial health of private unaided school, it will be desirable if Rule 134A is suitably amended so that Government compensate the expanses incurred by said schools in bringing home the objective of Rule 134A.