Religion-Based Reservation In India: A Comprehensive Analysis

ABSTRACT
Religion-based reservations in India are a pivotal yet ambivalent ingredient of the affirmative action policies of the nation. This article seeks to provide an assiduous analysis of the legal framework, historical context, judicial interpretations, and socio-political implications associated with religion-based reservations in India. By dissecting the constitutional provisions, landmark court judgments, and the intricate relationship between religion and caste, this article aims to shed light on the altercations and intricacies that permeate this aspect of Indian affirmative actions. The affirmative action policies of India, designed to promote social equality and address historical injustices, include the reservations in education and employment for the marginalized communities. While caste-based reservations are widely recognized, religion-based reservations are more tendentious and obscure. The Constitution of India, lays the cornerstone for these policies, aspiring to uplift socially and educationally backward classes. The religion-based reservations can aggravate the communal agitation and undermine the principles of secularism exalted in the Constitution of India. The religion-based reservations in India represent a complex convergence of legal, historical, and socio-political factors. This article ventures to provide a nuanced understanding of these reservations, highlighting the ongoing debates and the need for a balanced approach to affirmative action that addresses the divergent realities of the marginalized communities of India.

Keywords: Religion-Based Reservation, Affirmative Action Policies, Constitution of India, Social Equality, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Sachar Committee Report, Ranganath Mishra Commission Report, Caste-Based Reservations, Meritocracy, Constituent Assembly, British Colonial Administration, National Commission for Backward Classes Act, Communal Agitation, Political Mobilization.

INTRODUCTION
The affirmative action policies of India aspire to promote social justice by ensuring reservations in education, employment, and political portrayal for historically marginalized communities. Conventionally, the caste-based reservations have been the prime focus of these policies. However, the inclusiveness of the religion-based reservations has blazed substantial discourse, taking into consideration various legal, historical, and socio-political dimensions. Earlier, the reservation system of India was formulated to enliven Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs), communities that have undergone severe social and economic discrimination. This policy, revered under the provisions of the Constitution of India, provides these communities with a fixed percentage of seats in educational institutions, government jobs, and legislative bodies. The vindication behind the caste-based reservations lies in addressing the ingrained social hierarchies and providing equal opportunities to those marginalized communities by the caste system. In contrast, the religion-based reservations have a different emergence. The British Colonial administration first introduced separate electorates for Muslims and other religious communities in the early 20^th Century, aspiring to address the distinct socio-economic conditions of these groups. Post-Independence, India witnessed the continuation of special provisions for religious minorities, especially in the realm of education and cultural rights, though not through explicit reservations like those of the SCs and STs.
The contemporary koreroes on the religion-based reservations centres around the Muslim community, which, according to various government reports, lags in socio-economic indicators such as literacy, employment, and income levels. The Sachar Committee Report,2006[1] and the Ranganath Mishra Commission Report, 2007[2] illuminated the need for the affirmative action to uplift Muslims, recommending measures including the reservation in educational institutions and public sector employment. Legally, the issue of religion-based reservations is contentious. The Constitution of India prohibits the discrimination based on religion and guaranteed equality before the law. However, it also allows the state to make special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes. While caste-based reservations have been upheld by the Supreme Court of India under these provisions of the constitution, extending similar reservations to religious minorities raises complex constitutional questions.
Socio-politically, the religion-based reservations evoke strong reactions. Proponents assert that they are essential for achieving true social justice, as religious minorities, especially the Muslim communities face systematic discrimination and exclusion. Critics, however, assert that the reservations should be based solely on socio-economic criteria rather than religious identity, apprehending that the religion-based reservations could deepen communal divisions. The debate over the religion-based reservations in India reflects broader concerns about social justice, secularism, and national unity. As India continues to scuffle with issues of inequality and discrimination, the challenge lies in framing policies that balance the need for affirmative action with the principles of equality and secularism. This requires a nuanced understanding of the socio-economic realities of all disadvantaged communities, ensuring that affirmative action serves as a tool for genuine social transformation rather than political practically.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT
The concept of reservations in India has its roots in the pre-independence era, with the British Colonial Administration executing the various measures to address social inequalities among the different communities. One of the vital legislative watersheds in this context was the Government of India Act, 1935[3]. This Act introduced a system of reservations in legislative assemblies for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and the Scheduled Tribes (STs), recognizing the profound social discrepancies and striving to provide these marginalized communities with a veneer of portrayal and voice in governance. As India transitioned to Independence, the framers of the Constitution of India faced the extensive task of crafting a new legal and social framework for a diverse and stratified society. The cogitation within the Constituent Assembly were rigorous and panoramic, focusing on how best to elevate the communities that had been historically oppressed and marginalized. The korero was remarkably centered on caste-based discrimination, which was recognized as a more ubiquitous and ingrained issue compared to religious discrimination.
The decision to focus primarily on caste rather than religion in the context of reservations was influenced by several factors. First, caste-based discrimination had been a deeply rooted societal issue for centuries, significantly affecting the social dynamics, economic opportunities, and political participation. The rigid hierarchical structure of the caste system had resulted in systematic exclusion and exploitation of lower castes, particularly the SCs and the STs. In contrast, while religious minorities faced discrimination, the nature and extent of their marginalization were different and less uniformly pervasive across all aspects of life compared to the caste system. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, a prominent member of the Constituent Assembly and an ardent advocate for the rights of the oppressed, was instrumental in shaping the discourse on reservations. He emphasized the need for affirmative action to rectify historical injustices and provide equal opportunities to the SCs and STs. The Constituent Assembly Debates unveil that there was broad consensus on the need for such measures, though the specifics were debated rigorously. The resulting provisions in the Constitution of India were designed to ensure that the SCs and STs received adequate representation in legislative bodies, educational institutions, and public sector employment. Article 15 and Article 16 of the Constitution of India explicitly prohibit discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth and allow the affirmative action for SCs, STs, and other socially and educationally backward classes. Furthermore, Article 46[4] directs the state to promote the educational and economic interests of the SCs, STs and OBCs.
Over the years, the policy of reservations has evolved and expanded. The [5]Mandal Commission Report, 1980[6], which recommended reservations for the OBCs, was a significant development in this trajectory. This inclusion was based on the recognition that caste-based inequalities extended beyond the SCs and STs and that many other communities also faced systematic disadvantages. The concept of reservations in India, deeply embedded in the historical context of British Colonial Policies and Post-Independence constitutional debates, he has been a critical tool in addressing social inequalities. The primary focus on caste rather than religion was a strategic decision rooted in the understanding that caste-based discrimination was more pervasive and structurally entrenched. This framework aimed to ensure that historically oppressed communities received the support needed to achieve socio-economic parity and genuine inclusion in the democratic process.

LEGAL PROVISIONS
Constitutional Provisions:
The Constitution of India lays out a comprehensive framework for affirmative action to promote social equality and uplift the disadvantaged groups. This framework is primarily enshrined in several key articles:

Article 15: Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth[7]

Article 15(4) – This provision empowers the state to create special provisions for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Article 15(5) – This provision empowers the state to create special provisions, by law, for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in matters of admission to educational institutions, inclusive of the private institutions, whether aided or unaided by the State.

Article 16: Equality of opportunity in matters of public employment[8]

Article 16(1) – This provision guarantees equality of opportunity of all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the state.
Article 16(2) – This provision prohibits the discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence, or any of them.
Article 16(4) – This provision permits the State to make provisions for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens which, in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the state.
Article 16(4A) – This provision provides reservation in matters of promotion to any class or classes of posts in the services under the state in favour of the SCs and STs.

Article 29: Protection of interest of minorities[9]

Article 29(1) – This provision guarantees the right of any section of the citizens residing in the territory of India or any part thereof having a distinct language, script, or culture of its own to conserve the same.
Article 29(2) – This provision prohibits the denial of admission to educational institutions maintained by the State or receiving aid out of the State funds on grounds of religion, race, caste, language, or any of them.

Article 30: Right of Minorities to establish and administer educational institutions[10]

Article 30(1) – This provision grants all minorities, whether based on religion or language, the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.
Article 30(2) – This provision prohibits the State from discriminating against any educational institution managed by a minority in granting aid.

Article 46: promotion of educational and economic interests of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, and other weaker sections[11]

This provision mandates the State to promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people and protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation.

Article 341: Scheduled Castes

Article 341(1) – This provision empowers the President to specify the castes, races, or tribes which shall be deemed to be Scheduled Castes.
Article 341(2) – This provision empowers the Parliament to include or exclude any caste, race, or tribe from the list of Scheduled Castes.

Article 342: Scheduled Tribes

Article 342(1) – This provision empowers the President to specify the tribes or tribal communities which shall be deemed to be Scheduled Tribes.
Article 342(2) – This provision empowers the Parliament to include or exclude any tribe or tribal communities from the list of Scheduled Tribes.

Statutory Provisions:
The statutory provisions governing the reservations in India play a crucial role in identifying and classifying communities eligible for affirmative action. The statutes collectively from the backbone of the efforts of India to address the historical inequities and promote social justice.

The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1956[12]
This Act provides the detailed list of communities recognized as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
The National Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993[13]
This Act establishes the National Commission for Backward Classes to examine the inclusion of any class of citizens as a backward class and hear complaints of over-inclusion or under-inclusion of any backward class.
The Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950[14]
This Act specifies which castes are recognized as Scheduled Castes, initially limited to Hindus but later extended to include Sikhs and Buddhists.

JUDICIAL INTERPRETATIONS
State of Madras Vs. Champakam Dorairajan (1951)[15]
The Supreme Court, in this landmark judgment, struck down a government order that provide caste-based reservations in educational institutions, emphasizing that it is violative of the Article 29(2) of the Constitution of India, which prohibits the denial of admission into the educational institutions maintained by the State or receiving State aid on grounds religion, race, caste, language, or any of them. Although the case primarily dealt with the caste-based reservations, it set a precedent for examining reservations through the lens of constitutional equality principles. This decision indirectly impacted the discourse on the religion-based reservations by illuminating the need for constitutional amendments to explicitly permit affirmative action policies.
M.A. Pai Foundation Vs. State of Karnataka (2002)[16]
This judgment significantly impacted the religion-based reservations by reinforcing the rights of the minority educational institutions under Article 30(1) of the constitution. The Supreme Court held that these institutions, whether based on religion or language, have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. While this case did not directly address reservations, it rather confirmed that minority institutions could have their own admission policies, which would include reservations for students from their communities. This autonomy ensures that religious minorities can promote education within their communities without excessive state interference.
A. Inamdar Vs. State of Maharashtra (2005)[17]
In this case, the Apex Court of India, clarified the extent to which private unaided minority institutions could implement reservation policies. The court ruled that the state could not impose its reservation policies on unaided private minority institutions, reaffirming their autonomy under Article 30(1) of the Indian Constitution. This decision underscores the principles that while state policies can promote affirmative action, they must respect the rights of minority institutions to manage their own affairs, inclusive of the admissions, thereby indirectly affecting how religion-based reservations can be applied.
Balaji Vs. State of Mysore (1962)[18]
This case is relevant for the caste-based reservation’s interpretation of “socially and educationally backward classes.” The Apex Court of India ruled that the caste could not be the sole criterion for identifying backward classes, suggesting that economic and other social indicators must also be considered. This broader interpretation has implications for religion-based reservations, implying that merely belonging to a particular religion does not automatically confer the backward classes, other socio-economic factors must be evaluated.
Stephen College Vs. University of Delhi (1991)[19]
The Supreme Court, in this case, dealt with the admission policies of the St. Stephen College, a Christian Minority Institution. The court held that the minority institutions have the right to admit a certain percentage of students from their community but must also admit students based on merit from other communities. This decision balanced the right of minority institutions to administer their affairs while ensuring that their policies did not entirely exclude non-minority students, thus, addressing concerns related to religion-based reservations in minority institutions.
Anil Kumar Gupta Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (1995)[20]
In this case, the reservations for economically and socially backward classes, inclusive of the Muslims, in the context of admissions to technical institutions, were addressed. The Supreme Court of India, upheld the policy of the State of providing the reservations for the backward classes among the religious minorities, provided that the criteria for backwardness were met. This judgment affirmed that the religion-based reservations are constitutionally permissible if they are based on criteria of social and educational backwardness and do not exceed the overall reservation limit set by the court.
The judicial interpretations of religion-based reservations in India reflect a nuanced approach, balancing the rights of the minorities with constitutional principles of equality and non-discrimination. These judgments emphasize that while reservations can be an effective tool for uplifting marginalized religious communities, they must be implemented within the framework of the Constitution of India, ensuring that criteria for backwardness are met and overall societal balance is maintained.

SOCIO-POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS
Proponents of the religion-based reservations argue that such measures can help integrate the marginalized religious communities into the mainstream. By the provision of educational and employment opportunities, reservations can uplift socio-economically disadvantaged groups, leading to better representation in various sectors. This inclusivity can reduce social alienation and foster a sense of belonging among marginalized communities, contributing to communal harmony. Religion-based reservations aim to address historical injustices and socio-economic disadvantages faced by specific religious groups, the state acknowledges an attempt to rectify these persisting inequities, promoting social cohesion and reducing inter-community disparities.
The controversy over religious-based reservations in India, sparked by Andhra Pradesh’s 4% reservation for certain Muslim Communities being struck down and West Bengal’s proposal for a 10% reservation for economically and socially backward Muslims. The Indian Constitution prohibits discrimination based on religion but allows affirmative action for socially and educationally backward classes. While some Muslim Communities benefit from OBC reservations, many are executed. Historical and systematic discrimination against Muslims in Government jobs and education persists, with internal community divisions complicating the push for equitable reservations[21]. In Karnataka, Home Minister Amit Shah emphasized that the Constitution of India does not permit reservations based on religion. This statement was made by the Home Minister in response to the promise of the Congress Party to restore the 4% reservation for Muslims in the state if elected. The Home Minister reiterated that reservations could only be granted based on social and educational backwardness, not religious identity. The controversy arose from differing interpretations of Constitutional provisions related to affirmative action, blazing the debates on how best to address the needs of marginalized communities within the framework of the law[22].
Prime Minister, Narendra Modi and other BJP leaders have criticized the congress for attempting to allocate reservations to Muslims, asserting that it undermines the Constitutional framework which allows reservations based on social and educational backwardness, not religion. Several Muslim Communities are included in the OBC reservations at both central and state levels. The inclusion is based on Article 16(4) of the Constitution, which allows reservations for any backward class of citizens that is not adequately represented in public services. The third Backward Class Commission, led by Justice O. Chinnappa Reddy, identified Muslims as educationally and socially backward, a finding echoed by the 2006 Sachar Committee Report. In Karnataka, the BJP Government abolished a 4% reservation for Muslims within the OBC category, redistributing it to dominating Hindu castes. This move was criticized as it categorized Muslim based on social and economic studies, not religion. The Supreme Court has described the decision of the Government as “Shaky and Flawed.” In Andhra Pradesh, Muslims benefit from OBC quotas without encroaching on the existing OBC reservations, through a separate category known as BC-E. Past attempts by the state to implement 5% quota for Muslims were struck down by the High Court for not following proper procedures and exceeding the 50% reservation ceiling of the Supreme Court of India. The issue remains unresolved as it awaits a Supreme Court hearing. The Dalit Muslim have also sought inclusion under the Scheduled Caste quota. However, the Central Government has opposed this, citing the distinguished origins of Islam and Christianity compared to Hinduism, Sikhism, and Buddhism. The matter is pending the findings of a commission of inquiry. The issue of Muslim reservations highlights the ongoing tension between religious identity and constitutional mandates for social justice in India’s complex socio-political landscape[23].
At a rally in Telangana, PM Modi rejected the Claims of the Congress that the BJP would alter the Constitution and abolish reservations, vowing not to give Dalit, Adivasi, and OBC quotas to Muslim based on religion. He accused Congress of historical appeasement by granting reservations to Muslims in undivided Andhra Pradesh and criticized the party’s alleged disrespect for the Constitution[24]. PM Modi emphasized that reservations cannot be based on religion and vowed to prevent the congress from reallocating SC, ST, and OBC quotas to Muslim. He clarified that while he supports reservations for the poor across all religions, he opposes religion-based reservations. The constitution prohibits such allocations, although some states have implemented quotas for Muslim[25].
Religion-based reservation can become a significant tool for political parties to mobilize support from specific religious communities. Parties often use promises of reservations to garner votes, particularly in regions where certain religious groups constitute a significant portion of the electorate. Such reservations can lead to the rise of community-based politics, where political leaders and parties cater to the specific needs and demands of religious communities. This can result in the formation of vote banks, where communities consistently support parties that advocate for their interests. While this can empower marginalized groups, it also risks entrenching identity politics, where religious identity becomes a primary criterion for political allegiance and policy making. Political mobilization around religion-based reservations can influence broader policy decisions. Governments, responding to the electoral pressures, may enact or promise policies favouring specific religious communities. This dynamic can lead to significant legislative and administrative changes, impacting the overall governance framework. Religion-based reservations are often seen to promote social justice by providing opportunities to historically marginalized communities. However, critics argue that these reservations might dilute the principle of meritocracy, where positions and opportunities are based solely on individual merits. This tension between social justice and meritocracy is a central debate in the discourse on reservations. Critics also assert that the reservations based on the religion can exacerbate communal tensions. If perceived as preferential treatment, such policies might lead to resentment among other communities, potentially causing social unrest.

ANALYSIS AND SUGGESTION
The legal framework governing the religion-based reservations in India is intricate. While the Constitution permits affirmative action for socially and educationally backward classes, reservations based on the religion pose challenges due to constitutional mandates against the religious discrimination. Judicial interpretations have attempted to balance the need for social justice with constitutional principles, but ambiguity remains regarding the extent to which reservations can be extended to religious minorities. The historical evolution of reservations reflects the complex socio-political landscape of India. While caste-based observations have been predominant, the inclusion of religion-based reservations has blazed significant discourse.
There is a need for clarity concerning the interpretation of constitutional provisions related to the affirmative actions. Judicial pronouncements should provide clear guidelines on the permissibility and limitations of religion-based reservations, ensuring alignment with constitutional principles of equality and non-discrimination. Policymakers must rely on empirical data and evidence to identify socially and educationally backward communities, including religious minorities. Comprehensive studies, like the Sachar Committee Report, can provide insights into the socio-economic status of religious minorities and inform targeted interventions. Reservations should be implemented within a balanced framework that considers both social justice imperatives and the principles of meritocracy. While affirmative action is essential for addressing historical injustices, reservations should not compromise merit-based selection processes. Enhancing public awareness about the rationale and implications of affirmative action policies is crucial for fostering societal understanding and support. Political leaders must demonstrate ethical leadership by refraining from exploiting reservations for narrow electoral gains. Instead, they should prioritize the long-term interests of all communities and uphold the principles of constitutionalism and secularism.

CONCLUSION
Religious-based reservations in India represent a complex interplay of legal, historical, and socio-political factors. These reservations have profound implications for the affirmative action policies, social dynamics, and political landscape of the nation. The historical context unveils the evolution of reservations from the colonial policies to post-independence constitutional provisions. While caste-based reservations have been the primary focus, the inclusion of religion-based reservations has blazed significant discourse. This inclusion stems from the recognition of socio-economic disparities among religious minorities, particularly Muslims, and the need for targeted interventions to address them. Legally, religion-based reservations pose challenges due to constitutional mandates against discrimination on religious grounds. While affirmative actions for socially and educationally backward classes is permitted, extending reservations to religious minorities requires nuanced interpretation and adherence to constitutional principles. Judicial interpretations, as evidenced by landmark cases, underscore the delicate balance between promoting the social justice and upholding constitutional mandates. The role of the judiciary in ensuring that the reservations align with the constitution while addressing socio-economic disparities is crucial for maintaining fairness and equity. Socio-politically, religion-based reservations evoke strong reactions. Recent socio-political developments, such as the controversies over the Muslim reservations in states like Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, illustrate the complexities surrounding religion-based reservation. While there is recognition of the socio-economic backwardness of certain religious communities, the implementation of reservations must navigate constitutional constraints and political realities. The religion-based reservations in India represent a nuanced and contentious aspect of affirmative action policies. Balancing the objectives of social justice, equality, and communal harmony requires a multi-dimension approach that considers legal, historical, and socio-political factors. As India continues its journey towards inclusive development, it must strive to address the diverse needs of marginalized communities while uploading the principles of secularism and constitutionalism. Only through careful deliberations and inclusive policymaking can India achieve genuine social transformation and harmony for all its citizens.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written By – Sruti Sikha Maharana

References:

[1]https://www.minorityaffairs.gov.in/WriteReadData/RTF1984/7830578798.pdf

[2]https://www.mha.gov.in/sites/default/files/RanganathMishraVol_I_22102019_0.PDF

[3]https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1935/2/pdfs/ukpga_19350002_en.pdf

[4]https://www.education.gov.in/directive_principles_of_state_policy_article-46

[5]https://www.ncbc.nic.in/Writereaddata/Mandal%20Commission%20Report%20of%20the%201st%20Part%20English635228715105764974.pdf

[6]https://www.ncbc.nic.in/Writereaddata/Mandal%20Commission%20Report%20of%20the%202nd%20Part%20%20English635228722958460590.pdf

[7]https://indiankanoon.org/doc/609295/#:~:text=Prohibition%20of%20discrimination%20on%20grounds,birth%20or%20any%20of%20them.

[8] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/211089/

[9] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1888152/

[10] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1983234/