Caste is a distinctive feature of Indian identity. Hindu society is structured on the basis of a historic, inflexible occupation-based hierarchical structure known as the Caste System. The system, more formally, can be defined as “a Hindu hereditary class of socially equal persons, united in religion and usually following similar occupations, distinguished from other castes in the hierarchy by its relative degree of purity or pollution.” Deriving its roots from the Rig Veda, a holy text containing hymnals devoted to the Hindu gods, the Varna concept of the Caste System delineates four classes of people: the Brahmins, priests who occupy the highest strata; the Kshatriyas, warriors and rulers below the Brahmins; the Vaishyas, merchants and businessmen who constitute the third strata; and the Shudras, the lower most class consisting of peasants, artisans, and those performing other manual labor. There is another class of people which falls outside this established system – the Untouchables. People belonging to this caste are involved in tasks considered impure or polluting such as cremation, collecting garbage, disposing human waste, and other associated activities.

The continuance of this rigid social stratification has resulted in injustices towards members of the concerned castes. Discrimination against the untouchables in every aspect of social, political, and economic life became commonplace. Basic human and civil rights were thoroughly infringed upon. Property ownership and access to education were denied, thereby contributing to a poverty-ridden socio-economic cycle. In fact, the Planning Commission observed:

“Relegation of a defined section of a society to inequality is found perhaps only in India. Nowhere in the world has any particular section been devoid of basic human rights, dignity of labor and social equality on the basis of classification that finds its root in religious writings… It is this social stigma that pushed them down to the bottom of the social ladder alienating them from the mainstream of the society and assigning them to a position lower than several depressed classes who also suffered from social, economic, and educational deprivation. Since the caste system attains its sanctity in religious writings, emancipation from the rigid classification has been difficult to achieve for the lower groups.”

Post-independence, the government of India set out to reverse the trend and afforded special protections and privileges through “Constitutional safeguards” to the “scheduled castes” (SC). The National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC/the Commission), which traces its origin to the 1978 Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, was established as a means of overseeing the implementation and effectiveness of these safeguards – policies, laws, and related schemes and programs. In essence the commission, broadly, is responsible for the welfare and protection of these SC. However, given the rooted nature of the caste system, NCSC faces an uphill battle. Consequently this has resulted in calls to reform and strengthen the commission.

The 1931 Census was the first time in Indian history that the untouchables and other related castes, collectively called the “depressed classes,” were recognized. Following this, the Government of India Act, 1935, mandated the classification of these “socially disadvantaged” classes as “Scheduled Castes.” In 1936, a list of such castes was “notified in the Government of India (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1936.” Perhaps more significantly, affirmative action through the policy of reservation was first practiced in1937, when seats were reserved specifically for SC in the provincial elections.

Following independence in 1947, India set out to draft its Constitution.

“The framers of the Constitution took note of the fact that certain communities in the country were suffering from extreme social, educational and economic backwardness arising out of age-old practice of untouchability and certain others on account of this primitive agricultural practices, lack of infrastructure facilities and geographical isolation, and who need special consideration for safeguarding their interests and for their accelerated socio-economic development.”

The Constitution of 1949, through Article 17, outlawed untouchability and notified those “certain communities” as Scheduled Castes through Article 341’s Clause 1. Additionally, the Constitution locked in mechanisms that would ensure affirmative action for SC. Article 46 mandated that the “State shall promote with special care [for] the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, and, in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, and shall protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation.” Article 15 prohibited discrimination and Article 16 guaranteed equality of opportunity for public employment. Other provisions (Articles 330, 332, 243) guaranteed SC seats in legislative bodies to assure fair representation.

The framers also recognized the need for effective implementation and oversight to ascertain that required entities were complying with the law. In light of this, Article 338 mandated the appointment of a Special Officer for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (ST) “to investigate all matters relating to the safeguards provided for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under this Constitution and report to the President upon the working of those safeguards…”

The government realized that the existing mechanism under Article 338 was inadequate. The article was amended to replace the Special Officer with committee of members. In July 1978, the Ministry of Home Affairs established a Commission for Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes through Resolution No.13013/9/77-SCT(1). The duties of this new commission were fundamentally similar to those of the Special Officer. In 1987, through Ministry of Welfare’s Resolution No. BC-13015/12/86/SCD VI, the commission for SCs/STs was renamed the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (NCSCST). The resolution also established the commission as a “National Level Advisory Body to advise the Government on broad policy issues and levels of development of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.”

The commission was further strengthened in 1990 with the 65th Amendment to the Indian Constitution. It was “felt that a high level five member Commission under Article 338 will be a more effective arrangement in respect of the constitutional safeguards for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes…” The Amendment provided a statutory backing for the establishment of a NCSCST (as opposed to an administrative decision by the Ministry of Welfare). It also delineated the structure, functions, and specific powers of this Commission.

Under the 65th Amendment, the new Commission replaced the one established by the Ministry of Welfare Resolution. A total of four such Commissions were set up from 1992 to 2002:

• First Commission, headed by Ram Dhan, from March 1992- October1995
• Second Commission, headed by H.Hanumanthappa, from October 1995-December 1998
• Third Commission, headed by Dileep Singh Bhuria, from December 1998-March 2002
• Fourth Commission, headed by Bizay Sonkar Shastri, from March 2002-February 2004

In 2003, the 89th Amendment to the Indian Constitution was passed, which split the NCSCST into two separate Commissions: National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) and National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST). NCSC was placed under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment. The current Commission is the Third National Commission, the first Commission serving from February 2004 to May 2007, and the second from May 2007 to November 2010.

Headed by a chairperson, NCSC is headquartered at New Delhi and maintains 12 offices in different states. At the central level, the commission is divided into four wings:

• Administration and Coordination: responsible for personnel management and other administrative duties as well as coordination between the head office and the state offices.
• Service Safeguards: monitors the implementation of reservation and other mechanisms designed for SCs in government service as well as service in Public Sector Undertakings (PSU). This Wing also monitors legislation and policies as they affect SC safeguards.
• Atrocities and Protection of Civil Rights: deals with the frequent violent attacks on SCs as well as issues arising from the violation of various civil rights laws.
• Economic and Social Development: assists in the implementation and monitoring of various legal provisions aimed at assisting the economic and social development of SCs.

The Constitution of India defined Scheduled Castes under Article 366 (24): Scheduled Castes means such castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within such castes, races or tribes as are deemed under Article 341 to be Scheduled Castes for the purposes of this Constitution. Article 341 gives the President of India the express right to “specify the castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within castes, races or tribes which shall for the purposes of this Constitution be deemed to be Scheduled Castes in relation to that State or Union territory.” Owing to India’s diversity, the demographics of each state determine its SCs. Clause 9 of Article 338 necessitates that central and state governments “consult the commission on all major policy matters affecting SCs.” The commission therefore monitors demographics, policies, and legislation in all states and Union Territories. 

In addition to separating the NCSCST into two different commissions, the 89th Amendment to the Indian Constitution further provided a general framework for NCSC’s duties:

• To investigate and monitor all matters pertaining to the constitutional safeguards for SCs and any other relevant laws.
• To provide advice and expertise in the planning of socio-economic development policies for SCs and also to monitor and evaluate such policies.
• To author annual reports to the President which survey the safeguards as well as provide recommendations to bolster the implementation of these safeguards and other measures
• To perform other necessary and required functions to promote the interests of and protect SCs.

While the official duties and functions prescribed provide a broad and general mandate of ensuring overall wellness of SCs, the primary activity of the commission in this regards is monitoring and enforcing the implementation of the various Constitutional protections as well as related laws. Broadly, these safeguards can be grouped into “social, economic, educational and cultural, political, and service safeguards.” The commission thus is responsible for the effective adherence to:

• Article 15 which enables the government to reserve seats in educational and other organizations for SCs
• Article 17 which outlawed untouchability
• Article 23 which prohibits forced labor (a social ill that mostly affects SCs)
• Article 24 which outlawed child employment in certain circumstances
• Article 25 which upholds that Hindu religious institutions are to remain open to all Hindus (in order to prevent higher castes from prohibiting the entry of the lower castes)
• Article 46 which mandates the government to be proactive in promoting educational and economic interests of SCs
• Articles 243 and 334 which reserve seats for SCs in legislative bodies at the local, state, and national levels
• The 77th, 81st, 82nd, and 85th amendments which advances affirmative action for SCs in a variety of ways.

In conjunction with the constitutional guarantees, various laws have been enacted over the years to strengthen the SC protection and promotion infrastructure. Consequently, the commission is tasked with monitoring the implementation of the following laws (in some cases, as they pertain specifically to SCs) as well: Minimum Wages Act, 1948; The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955; Bonded Labor System (Abolition) Act, 1976; The Protection of Civil Rights Rules, 1977; The Child Labor (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986; The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989; The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1995; and other related state-specific legislation

NCSC is also tasked with evaluating the impact of a wide variety of development schemes and programs undertaken by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, University Grants Commission (UGC), and other ministries and entities of the central government. These can be categorized into educational and cultural scholarships, employment opportunities, welfare assistance, victim assistance, and financial assistance.

The Economic and Social Development wing at the headquarters, as mentioned before, concerns itself with those provisions and entities that enable economic and social mobility for the SCs. Some of the specific mechanisms under the wing’s supervision are:

• Scheduled Caste Sub Plan (SCSP) – Earmarked funding from state and central governments for the development of SCs.
• National Scheduled Castes Finance and Development Corporation (NSFDC) – A financial entity under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment tasked with “financing, facilitating and mobilizing funds from other sources and promoting the economic development activities of the persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes living below double the poverty line.”
• Education schemes for SCs – this includes seat reservations, scholarships, access to facilities, etc.
• Handling complaints on issues other than untouchability, atrocities, and government employment matters.

The commission is also, by law, required to “inquire into specific complaints with respect to the deprivation of rights and safeguards of Scheduled Castes.” This mandate extends to the investigation of the frequent atrocities against SCs as well. In cases of atrocities the commission undertakes a broad range of actions, from making sure the required measures are taken against the perpetrators to the proper rehabilitation of the victims. Clause 5 of Article 338 grants the commission the power to function as a civil court, which greatly increases the commission’s reach and ability to influence matters.

The exact budget breakdown for the commission is unavailable. Allocation of its funds comes from the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment’s Scheduled Castes related disbursement. Taking into the account the duties of the commission (no special training or equipment required and the fact that it does not award any scholarships or other grants), a dominant chunk of the budget most likely goes to operational costs, primarily salaries.

The P.L. Punia and Mayawati Grudge Match

The exhaustive diffusion of the notions of untouchability and the supposed superiority of the ‘higher castes’ coupled with a huge rural population who cling to such orthodoxy means that NCSC invariably ends up criticizing the SC situation in all states. However, the commission, headed by P.L. Punia, and the state of Uttar Pradesh (UP), under the erstwhile leadership of Mayawati, had a particularly acrimonious relationship. The commission observed that UP as a state had higher than usual atrocities against the Dalits (untouchables) and that it was difficult to secure cooperation from state officials for inquiries and investigations. The commission also reported that the UP government was not upholding a 23% reservation in government seats for Dalits and systematically misused funds earmarked for SCs. Commenting on a trip to the state, Punia publicly stated that “since the state [UP] government was unconcerned with the problems being faced by Dalits it tried, with all its might, to put all kinds of hurdles to prevent us from holding meetings with them so we could not know about the atrocities being perpetrated on them.” He has also publicly called for Mayawati to resign from the CM post on “moral grounds.”

Mayawati, the chief minister (CM) of UP, has questioned the authority of NCSC to scrutinize complaints from backward classes.  In response, Mayawati has demanded Punia’s resignation for alleged inability to stop violations against SCs.

It is worth noting that Mayawati and Punia are both Dalits. The contentious relationship can be traced back to their personal histories. Punia served as the Principal Secretary to Mayawati in 1995, 1997, and 2002. However the two had a falling out in the aftermath of the Taj Heritage Corridor scam. Punia switched from Mayawati’s Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) to Congress, and was later elected to the Lok Sabha. Both have publicly commented against the other with Mayawati terming Punia a “traitor” to the Dalit cause. Mayawati’s BSP caters primarily to SCs, STs, backward classes, and minorities. In return Punia has called Mayawati “corrupt” and “anti-Dalit.” As leaders, their rivalry morphed into a showdown between the NCSC and the UP government.

Why Does Mayawati Hate Her Former Aide P L Punia? (by Virendra Nath Bhatt, Tehelka)

Why Mayawati Loves To Hate Former Aide P L Punia (by Virendra Nath Bhatt, The Indian Express)

Punia Hits Back At Mayawati, Terms Anti-Dalit (Yahoo! News Video)

Mayawati Demands Punia Resignation for Chopping of Dalit's Hand (The Siasat Daily)

'Mayawati Should Resign On Moral Grounds' (Oneindia News)

Congress Looks To Corner Mayawati on Dalit Front (by Subodh Ghildiyal, Times of India)

Human Rights Documentation: Dalits/Scheduled Castes - 2011 (by K. Samu, Indian Social Institute)

Human Rights Documentation: Dalits/Scheduled Castes - 2012 (by K. Samu, Indian Social Institute)

Report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

On February 18, 2009, the Committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes for the 14th Lok Sabha presented its 36th report titled “National Commission for the Scheduled Castes – its mandate and achievements – A review of its organization and working.” Recognizing that the NCSC will “not be able to work fearlessly and independently unless it is given independence in its day to day working by allowing it to decide on its own administrative, financial and legal matters,” the report outlined specific recommendations to strengthen the Commission. These include:

• The strength of the commission of should be increased and vacancies should be filled.
• Clause (9) of Article 338 – the commission should be consulted on all major policy matters affecting SC – should be strongly enforced.
• Mechanisms should be developed to ensure the participation of the chairperson of NCSC in the planning process for SC development.
• Eight new regional offices should be creates and existing offices should be upgraded.
• The commission should me made completely autonomous by giving it full administrative and financial powers so that it does not have to depend on the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment.
• Propose to create a separate Department of Grants for NCSC to enable independent functioning.
• The Constitution should be amended to provide greater powers to the Commission so as to enable it to act as an effective and independent organization.
• Number of members on the commission should be increased from five to seven
• In the event that state governments are not cooperative, the Constitution should be amended to establish rules that make state governments accountable for their inaction.

Can Reservations Adequately Address Inequality?  

By far the most important focus of India’s SC policy is the quota (reservation) system. Seats are reserved for SC individuals in a number of areas including college admissions, scholarships, government funding, government and private sector jobs, and legislative bodies. While this system has undoubtedly benefited SC, it has also come under ringing criticism from those who see it as unfair. One observer notes: “The persistence of constitutionally sanctioned privileges to the scheduled castes…has divided Indians into two divisive camps – pro and anti reservationists.” In 2006, strong sentiments against the quota system in general resulted in massive protests across India when the Indian government decided to institute reservations for individuals from ‘Other Backward Classes’ in government and private institutions of higher education.

Pro-Reservation

NCSC, as the statutory entity in charge of ensuring SC welfare, unabashedly supports continuing the quota system. They point to data that suggests not only the improvements gained by SC as a result of the reservation but also to data that shows that much work needs to be done. The commission also subscribes to the ‘diversity’ argument. Educational, business, and governance bodies in India are dominated by people from the upper-caste. Reservations for SC can help promote social equality as well as act as a social unifier.

Do Reservations Work? (by Tarun Jain, India Together)

Enlarge the Pie (The Times of India)

Census Rewriting SC, ST Narrative (by Anil Padmanabhan & Remya Nair, Livemint.com)

The Debate Over Reservation (by Vir Sanghvi, Hindustan Times)

Anti-Reservation

This position is advocated mostly by those individuals who see the reservation system as positive discrimination as well as a disregard for meritocracy. Reservation policies block access to institutions and jobs to otherwise qualified candidates. Reserving seats “implies a discount on merit, since it becomes mandatory to fill posts with less qualified persons or else keeping posts unfilled for years on.” Experts in this camp have suggested replacing the quota system with affirmative action. Affirmative action implies a preference for SC candidates without explicitly reserving a set number of seats and thereby “addresses the problem of correcting an imbalance, without sacrificing merit. “

NCSC & NCST demand extension of reservation for Scheduled Castes and Tribes in Government Autonomous Bodies and Armed Forces ; Supports reservation in Private Sector (Press Information Bureau, Government of India)

Reservation Debate: A Great Opportunity To Re-strengthen Dalit Bahujan Alliance (by V.B. Rawat, Counter Currents)

The Reservation Debate: Missing Components (by V.K. Natraj, The Hindu)

Quota In Promotion Brings Maya, Punia On Same Side (by Pankaj Shah, The Times of India)

Affirmative Action, Not Reservation: Experts (by Vineeta Pandey, Daily News & Analysis)

Buta Singh

Dr. Buta Singh served as the chairperson of the Second NCSC from May 2007 to May 2010. Born in Punjab in 1934, Singh holds a B.A. from Lyallpur Khalsa College, an M.A. from Guru Nanak Khalsa College, and a Ph.D. from Bundelkhand University. He was first elected to the 3rd Lok Sabha in 1962 and was re-elected to the 4th, 5th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 12th, and 13th Lok Sabha. His more prominent central government appointments include Union Cabinet Minister for Communications, Union Cabinet Minister for Civil Supplies, Consumer Affairs, and Public Distribution, chairman of the Parliamentary Committee on Defense, Union Minister of State for Shipping and Transport, and chairman, Public Accounts Committee. Prior to his appointment as the chairperson of NCSC, he served as the governor of Bihar. Over the course of his political career he has belonged to the Akali party, the Indian National Congress, and Bharatiya Janata Party (B.J.P.).

Official Bio