A study of Educational criteria of the NCBC : Mahesh Chandrashekaran
The criteria adopted by NCBC for evaluating a caste/community for the purpose of grant of BC status in respect of Educational status are as follows:
Educational
(viii) Castes and Communities, whose literacy rate is at least 8% less than the State or district average.
(ix) Castes and communities, of which the proportion of matriculates is at least 20% less than the State or district average.
(x) Castes and communities, of which the proportion of graduates is at least 20% less than the State or district average
Assumptions (reasonable) for the purposes of study
(i) A State X has 10 castes, 2 of whom are Scheduled Castes (SC), 7 castes are BC and one is NBC (non-backward)
(ii) The State X has an average literacy rate of 73.50% (as per Census 2001). Separate male/female literacy rate has been ignored.
(iii) A literate may be defined as a person above the age of seven years who can read/write in any language with some amount of understanding. [this is not an assumption]
(iv) In this State X, excepting one caste (caste no 10) people, all other caste people are presumed to be categorized as backward/scheduled. It naturally follows that each and every caste declared ‘backward’ in this state has a literacy level at least 8% percent less than the State Average. In the case of Scheduled castes, the literacy rate is considered 15% less than the state average.
(v) The State’s total population undoubtedly consists of various populations of various castes and each and every caste population must certainly have its own literacy rate. The state’s average literacy rate could also be considered as the average of the summation of average literacy rates of all different castes.
(vi) The literacy rate of Caste no 10 (non backward) is presumed to be 100%, which is the maximum.
Conclusions from the study
(i) Castes and communities which are found to be educationally backward (along with other criteria) and declared backward, get to avail reservation in respect of the State as a whole and not the district alone. The study of literacy rate is irrelevant so far as a district is concerned. The literacy rate is obtained for the whole state and not district wise and certainly not caste-wise. Therefore invoking ‘literacy rate’ of a caste/community in terms of ‘district’ makes no sense. The OBC certificate is issued irrespective of residence in that ‘district’ only.
(ii) But why is the average for district is sought to be taken? There is no doubt that had the ‘State’ been taken as the base, for example in TN, none of the castes/communities would have qualified for BC status due to the problems posed by elementary mathematics. There is also no doubt that in framing the entire criteria; the hand of the casteist groups of TN is plainly visible. A study of the astounding results given in the excel sheet will prove why it is so.
(iii) The Educational Clause considers only primary literacy, matriculation and graduation. The percentage of professional degree holders i.e. doctors/engineers/lawyers in each caste is conveniently ignored. It is impossible to believe that the percentage of professionally qualified people is not worth considering. There is no doubt that this was considered in case of TN/Andhra/Kerala/ Karnataka/ Maharashtra and hence considering the ground realities, this issue was deliberately ignored.
(iv) When State Average Literacy Rate (SALR) is considered to be 73.50, assuming the lone Caste 10 (non-backward) to be 100% literate, the two SC castes to be 58.50% (15% less than SALR), then none of the BC castes can be less by even the minimum of 8% from the SALR. (See calculations)
(v) For the ten castes to have the SALR of 73.50%, the total literacy rate of various castes (ten in this case) is divided by 10. This gives the SALR of 73.50%. If the SC literacy rate is considered to be 58.50% and the lone NB caste is 100%, then all the so-called BC must have a minimum literacy rate of 74 if the average literacy rate is to be 73.50%. Since all castes other than the two Scheduled Castes have a minimum LR of 74, higher than the SALR of 73.50%, it follows that no caste is eligible to be declared backward.
(vi) But we know that no caste in India boasts of 100% literacy, including the most literate Jains (among whom the literacy is supposed to be in excess of 98%). It follows that the lone NC caste in the study must have maximum LR of 95%, in which case, none of the BC castes are even remotely backward.
(vii) However, if all the nine castes are indeed backward, then the lone NB caste must have a literacy rate of 153.50%!
(viii) If some of the BCs are not uniformly backward and some are more backward, then would mean that the lone NB caste must have a literacy rate of 173.50%!
(ix) If the lone NB caste is considered to be 90% literate (even this estimate actually is very high), then none of the BC would have a literacy rate less than the SALR. In fact, many of the BC would actually have a literacy rate that is considerably higher than the SALR!
(x) If all the so-called Backward castes are having a LR that is considerably higher than the SALR, then either all are non-backward or the SALR is wrong.
(xi) The study for Clauses (ix) and (x) under Education would probably have the same pattern.
(xii) We also know that no data is currently available on state-wise and caste-wise LR.
(xiii) No marks for guessing which state this study pertains to.
