Is SC's verdict on reservation good for our development ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prabhu Ram

I am not sure of the number 3000 btw but let's not go down that slippery path. With a well targeted and implemented system India should have reversed the conditions considerably in these 60 years.

---

:confused2:

And as Podalai clearly said the reservations are critically important, and they can achieve a lot, but they can't achieve everything. Systems, processes, implementation - ithellAm thAndiya oru vishayam irukku IMO. But I dont want to get into that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MADDY

wat i meant was, 100% of those 27% seats are going to be filled by the creamy layer.........they surely are undeserving.......

---

MADDY, if you read the judgement, it clearly says, "“Failure to exclude creamy layer would render the quota law unconstitutional. " I can't understand your argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kannannn

Actually, yes. I agree. In the fullness of time it will. But I am not optimistic about, say even 100 years from now. Even groups that have been traditionally wealthy and influential accept their 'inferiority' and surrender meekly. Could a rich and influential Dalit ever hope to enter the sanctum sanctorum of Guruvayur without causing a scandal?

---

Possibly not, but social inequality is relative. Not too long ago - within the living memory of a few hubbers, in fact - a Dalit in bits of TN couldn't dream of wearing slippers or covering the upper part of his body, leave alone becoming a programmer. It's now entirely likely that - in TN at least - they can even hope to become priests in temples.

You're right that it'll be a long while before the last vestiges of social inequality are removed, but economic and intellectual progress can make our society a far more equal one within our lifetimes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kannannn

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MADDY

wat i meant was, 100% of those 27% seats are going to be filled by the creamy layer.........they surely are undeserving.......

---

MADDY, if you read the judgement, it clearly says, "“Failure to exclude creamy layer would render the quota law unconstitutional. " I can't understand your argument.

---

do u think political parties will let it implement without "tampering" the creamy layer clause?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prabhu Ram

Is the SC directive binding on the government or not ? I guess it is not but I am not sure. So is there a risk that the government can conveniently go ahead and implement the reservations without adhering to creamy-layer exclusion ?

---

My impression is that the SC intended it to be binding, but I haven't had a chance to read the full judgment(s) as yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roshan

And as Podalai clearly said the reservations are critically important, and they can achieve a lot, but they can't achieve everything. Systems, processes, implementation - ithellAm thAndiya oru vishayam irukku IMO.

---

:exactly:

BTW, MADDY, if you are talking about the 'creamy layer' masquerading as 'deserving candidates', we have to remember that any law, any system, has its shortcomings and loopholes. I agree that the thrust should be on making the identification as foolproof as possible. Perhaps, we can address that as the law is implemented.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by podalangai

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prabhu Ram

Is the SC directive binding on the government or not ? I guess it is not but I am not sure. So is there a risk that the government can conveniently go ahead and implement the reservations without adhering to creamy-layer exclusion ?

---

My impression is that the SC intended it to be binding, but I haven't had a chance to read the full judgment(s) as yet.

---

Actually, there are many 'suggestions' with regard to the creamy layer. So, the impression is that not every point is binding. I guess it is still early to discuss the nitty gritties without knowing what the government response is going to be.

This makes it all pretty clear:
http://www.hindu.com/2008/04/11/stor...1159961200.htm

Roshan, you are right. What I was trying to say is, we have achieved only a fraction of what ought to have been achieved if the reservation had been properly targeted and implemented. This would have reversed a lot of the damage making the 3000 vs. 60 years seem much less acute than it seems today.

Quote:

---

"“Failure to exclude creamy layer would render the quota law unconstitutional. "

---

This is what I was looking for :2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MADDY

do u think political parties will let it implement without "tampering" the creamy layer clause?

---

Adhuku thaane pa nidhimanra iharzhchi ("contempt of court")-ndu edho irukku! :fishgrin:

Besides, given how heated this issue is, you can bet that there'll be a host of people waiting to pounce on the government if their definition of the "creamy layer" doesn't meet the court's criteria. And the government knows that.

I wonder what arguments, even prima-facie, the political parties would have against the exclusion of the creamy layer.