UGC's retrogressive step

By Ghanshyam Shah

THE UNIVERSITY Grants Commission has recently taken a decision to abrogate reservation for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates in admissions to M.Phil. and Ph.D. programmes. This retrogressive step is part of a series of decisions related to education of the various bodies of the Government such as the ICHR, the ICSSR, the Institute of Advanced Study and the Governments of Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh. It once again reveals the BJP's and its parivar's agenda to undo whatever little that has been done so far to build secular values and promote the oppressed sections, particularly Dalits and Adivasis.

Hindu fundamentalists of all hues have never supported provisions related to protective discrimination for SCs and STs. In fact, they opposed them within and outside the Constituent Assembly. At the same time, the BJP has not opposed reservation thanks to political exigency. But it has never been enthusiastic about the cause of the oppressed either. In fact, the rank and file of the party actively supported the upper caste Hindus who spearheaded the anti-reservation agitation in Gujarat during the Eighties. Reservation does not fit in the sangh parivar's ideological framework, which ignores caste-based division and discrimination. The RSS advocates the theory of ``social assimilation'' of Dalits and Adivasis. In the parivar's terminology, the latter are called Vanvasi, that is forest dweller Hindus. According to Dr. Hedgewar, founder of the RSS, ``We are one. We are all Hindus, where is untouchability? For us all are Hindus and nothing else... There is no varna of the chaturvarna or of caste. Today we have only one varna and jati, that is Hindu.'' The ideologues fear that reservation creates and perpetuates caste consciousness, which is detrimental to Hindu unity. The Chairman of the UGC and his newly- constituted team, which took the above decision, are either ex-members or sympathisers of the RSS.

Of course, the UGC has to find alibis and loopholes in the given system to translate its agenda into action. In this case, the UGC found the report of the National Commission for SCs and STs an excuse. The UGC mentions that its decision was in response to ``the comments'' of the Commission's 4th Report for the period 1996-97 and 1997-98. The UGC gives the impression that it complied with the Commission's comments. Let us see the comments of the Commission:

``A case of non-implementation of reservation policy in M.Phil. and Ph.D. courses by Delhi University was brought to the notice of the Commission. Some SC student who had passed M.A. in Hindi had applied for M.Phil. course in Hindi in the North Campus. As per UGC guidelines, reservation for SCs and STs has to be provided in all courses at all levels. Accordingly, out of 30 seats for M.Phil (Hindi) course 5 seats were to be reserved for SC and two seats were to be reserved for ST candidates but the Head of Department of Hindi in Delhi University is reported to have given admission to 3 SC students only. This appears to be a clear case of violation of reservation policy meant for SCs and STs. The Commission urges that Delhi University should review the decision of the Academic Council at the earliest and provide reservations in M.Phil./Ph. D. courses at the earliest. Other Central Universities should also follow the guidelines regarding the reservation in admission in M.Phil. courses in letter and spirit.''

The above comments are unambiguous and the directive is clear. There is no scope for any misunderstanding. The Commission came into existence by an act of Parliament. It is assigned to monitor the implementation of Government policies, to inquire into specific complaints of SCs and STs, and to recommend measures to make government policy effective. Therefore it is obligatory on the part of the Ministry of Human Resource Development and the UGC to implement the directive without delay. Instead, the UGC has ignored the Government policy. By this, it has justified the act of the Delhi University which violated its own guidelines regarding reservation for SC/ST students. The UGC toed the line of defaulters and legitimised their (in) action. On the other hand, the new team of the UGC has frizzed various subject panels which are responsible for growth and development of various disciplines. This speaks loudly of the priority and constitutional commitment of the new UGC team.

In good governance, one would expect that decisions be based on evidence. The UGC established an SC and ST Cell in 1979 which is supposed to collect information regarding course-wise admission and appointment of SC/ST candidates in teaching and non-teaching positions under reservation. Instead of consulting and collating the data from its own cell on the issue, or undertaking an evaluation of the provisions for reservations which are in operation for over two decades to find out the impact, the UGC has taken the decision with preconceived notions. Several universities have not implemented the reservation provisions. The outcome of the policy that some universities have implemented with sincerity is encouraging. A few of the SC/ST scholars who got admission for M.Phil. and Ph.D. under reservation in the Eighties has in course of time become teachers in various universities. Their quality of research is not below average as far as social sciences and languages, about which I have some knowledge, are concerned. More important, a few of them have made a mark in social sciences by raising new relevant issues and providing new perspectives emanating from their experiences. They have enriched social sciences and literature. They contributed to, in the Supreme Court's language, ``public good''. They are the scholars who raise critical comments on the present social order. Hindu fundamentalists are uncomfortable with the contribution of these scholars, which provides radically different interpretation of history and the present society system.

Most of the universities have not so far filled up teaching positions reserved for SCs/STs on the ground of ``unavailability of qualified candidates''. In some universities, the post of professor is kept reserved in a particular subject where even a lecturer from the reserved category is not available. Over time, such positions are made open. Now the UGC has blocked the road for SC/ST students for pursuing M.Phil and Ph.D. essential degrees for qualifying for teaching and research positions.

So eventually the universities and research institutes will not get qualified SC/ST candidates; and reservation in the institutions of higher education will become redundant. The present rulers are bent upon reversing course, which will affect the interests of the upward mobile SC/ST youths.

On the other hand, political leaders including the Dalit leaders of all parties reduce reservation to a ridiculous level by incorporating such social group which enjoy dominance and have not experienced social discrimination in the recent past. This tactic makes reservation redundant and also generates conflict among the oppressed.

In the same way, the Cabinet has recently decided to amend Article 16 with a view to clearing the backlog vacancies reserved for SC/ST. This is nothing but eyewash and tokenism for political consumption to get the support of the deprived sections. A similar campaign was launched a decade before and the results are there for all to see.

(The writer is Professor, Centre of Social Medicine & Community Health, Jawaharlal Nehru University.)

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : A crown of thorns
Next     : Review Commission imbroglio - I