How the issue of OBC reservation has shaken Maharashtra’s politics

This followed weeks of closed-door debate among allies of the ruling coalition government, the Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA), comprising the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), Congress and Shiv Sena. MVA leaders said that another ordinance, which targets three other laws — these pertaining to urban local bodies — is in the offing.

The issue of OBC political reservation in municipal and district bodies has been on the boil in Maharashtra in the past decade. Indeed, even the previous Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government in the state brought out one in 2019 — it eventually lapsed after the new ruling coalition took charge — as OBC communities form a significant chunk of the electorate.

However, their significance begs the question: Why is the issue of political reservation under the scanner in the first place? Why has it remained unresolved for so long? And what is the political significance of reservation in local body polls in a state that will see a large swathe of its districts vote for local representation early next year?

To answer the first question, a recount of the past year will help.

Political reservation circa 2020

In Maharashtra, five laws govern local bodies and their elections: the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act and Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and the Industrial Townships Act, Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act for Zilla Parishads, Panchayat Samiti and Gram Panchayats and the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act.

In 2019, an individual named Vikas Kishanrao Gawali challenged Section 12 (2) (c) of the last Act in the Supreme Court. His petition also challenged two notifications of the State Election Commission (SEC) for providing reservation that exceeded 50% of the total seats in Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis in five districts.

On March 4, 2021, the Supreme Court passed an order which quashed of section as it accorded 27% political reservation to OBC candidates, even in Scheduled Areas, where reservation for Scheduled Caste and Tribe (SC and ST) candidates was half the number of seats. The apex court said that this went against the 50% cap on reservation, mandated by a 1992 SC order, referred to as the Indra Sawhney judgment.

It read down the provision to mean that reservation in favour of OBCs in the concerned local bodies can be notified to the extent that it does not exceed 50% of the total seats reserved in favour of SC/ST/OBC candidates taken together.

Significantly, it directed SEC to hold bypolls in the handful of districts where the previous candidates had vacated their seats on account of exceeding reservation cap. Since the current computation of 27% was based on census data collected in 1931, the bench ordered: “…The State is free to pursue with the Union of India for getting requisite information which can be then made available to the dedicated Commission to be established by it for conducting a contemporaneous rigorous empirical inquiry into the nature and implications of backwardness of the concerned group.”

Two things happened as a result of this — Maharashtra moved the Supreme Court again in July, this time to seek data from the Socio Economic Caste census conducted by the Centre in 2011 and, on September 13, the SEC ordered bypolls in six districts for candidates in general category.

With political reservation under the scanner, OBC community leaders started pressuring the government to restore the quote and to conduct a survey that would provide fresh data on the basis of which communities can seek reservation.

On June 29, the Maharashtra State Commission for Backward Classes (MSCBC) announced that it would conduct a survey to collect empirical data on backward communities in the state.

Starting next February, a majority of the municipal corporations and district councils (Zilla Parishads) will be going to polls. With Marathas and OBCs being the two majority communities that play a significant role in state politics, the MVA government cannot afford to sit on its hands.

The ordinance thus was a matter of political exigency.

A delicate balance

In Maharashtra politics, OBCs are considered second largest group after the Maratha community. There are 410 castes that fall under the OBC category in the state. The dominant castes among the OBCs are Vanjari, Mali, Teli, Dhangar and Kunbi (the last being a sub-caste of Marathas), but all of them have different political preferences.

Since the formation of the state in 1960, Marathas have dominated state politics with 11 out of 19 chief ministers (CMs) from this community alone. However, post 1991, when the Mandal Commission’s recommendations on OBC reservation in government employment was put into practice, OBC communities began to get more organised.

In the current assembly, less than one fifth of the 288 legislators are from the OBC community. (It’s important to note here that several MLAs from the Kunbi community count themselves as belonging to the Maratha community, which is politically better represented.)

Prominent leaders such as state Congress chief Nana Patole, NCP ministers Chhagan Bhujbal, Dhananjay Munde and Jitendra Awhad, BJP’s Pankaja Munde, Congress minister Vijay Wadettiwar (the state minister for OBC welfare, among other portfolios) are all important OBC leaders. They have been leading the demand to restore reservation for community in local self-government bodies.

Marathas, SC, ST and Muslims have formed a strong support base for the Congress for decades. This combination also helped the Marathas maintain their hold over state politics. However, in the post-Mandal era, parties such as the BJP and Shiv Sena built their support base among OBC communities. In past two decades, the Congress and the NCP have managed to gain some ground among the OBCs.

As things stand, all major parties in the state, including the three coalition partners and the opposition BJP, are in favour of restoring reservation.

“The MVA government is trying to get the reservation restored but it has not made any substantial progress. As long as the coming elections are concerned, it depends on who sets the narrative. As of now, BJP is popular among the OBCs. It will try to field more OBC candidates in local polls to get the entire community on its side. The MVA will also have to do a tightrope walking to avoid antagonising its Maratha vote bank while wooing the OBCs,” Padmabhushan Deshpande, a political analyst, said.

Why representation matters

Representation has been a subject of debate in Maharashtra’s politics since the turn of the previous century.

The history of reservation for OBCs in employment and education is distinct from that of political reservation, which is more of a post-Mandal-era phenomenon. It is important to remember that it is the latter which has come under the scanner. The other types of reservation for OBC communities remain intact.

In 1928, the Government of Bombay set up a committee under the chairmanship of OHB Starte to identify backward classes and recommend special provisions for their advancement. The report, submitted two years later, identified three categories — “depressed classes”, “aboriginal and hill tribes” and “other backward classes” — and recommended the provision of special facilities regarding education and recruitment in government services for members of these categories.

After India gained independence, the Constitution gave the executive the power to define OBC categories and to make special provisions for their advancement and that of the SC and ST communities. After the Kaka Kalelkar Commission was formed in 1953, the Centre informed states that they were free to draw up their own respective lists on the basis of criteria worked out by them.

By the time the Mandal Commission was formed in 1979, at least 10 states including Maharashtra had set up commissions; another eight had notified lists of OBC for educational grants, employment and other benefits. In 1992, part of the Mandal Commission’s recommendations was implemented and OBC persons across the country received 27% reservation in central government jobs.

In 1994, Maharashtra amended the 1961 Act to include 27% reservation in local bodies.

The recommendations of the Mandal Commission to ensure reservation in jobs and education, and Maharashtra’s decision to introduce political reservation was underpinned by a Constitutional impetus — this was upheld twice by the top court, once in 1992 (the Indira Sawhney case that capped reservations at 50%) and later, in 2010, when in Dr K Krishna Murthy and Others v. Union of India, the SC upheld the 50% cap but confirmed that states were within their right to ensure reservation for OBC communities.

“It would be safe to say that not all of the groups which have been given reservation benefits in the domain of education and employment need reservations in the sphere of local self-government. This is because the barriers to political participation are not of the same character as barriers that limit access to education and employment. This calls for some fresh thinking and policy-making with regard to reservations in local self government,” the SC noted in 2010.

The 2010 judgment was significant for another reason.

It laid down three conditions under which reservation should be followed: One, a dedicated commission should be set up to conduct contemporaneous rigorous empirical inquiry into the nature and implications of the backwardness of the OBC communities. Two, the proportion of reservation should be specified for each local body in light of the recommendations of the Commission, so as not to fall foul of overbreadth. Three, reservation should not exceed an aggregate of 50% of total seats reserved in favour of SCs/STs/OBCs taken together.

In Maharashtra, the limit would often get exceeded in some districts. As such, when members are elected to the three-tier Panchayati Raj system (gram panchayat of a village, Panchayat Samiti of a tehsil or block and Zilla Parishad or district council) are elected every five years, a certain percentage of seats are reserved for SC and ST candidates based on the percentage of their populations; the OBC reservation was over and above this, which often drove the aggregate of reserved seats to more than 50% in some districts. Reservation enabled the participation of socially and economically backward communities in local governance which helped build the foundation for their role in regional or state level politics (the state assembly does not have reservation for OBCs).

However, not everyone was on board.

In 2018, Vikas Kishanrao Gawali challenged OBC reservation in the Akola and Washim district councils following which the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court stayed the elections. In 2019, Gawali moved the Supreme Court and other petitioners such as the OBC Welfare Foundation, which sought to protect the law, also filed petitions. It was a response to this petition that the SC delivered it verdict on March 4.

And back to the present

OBCs were found to comprise 52% of the country’s population by the Mandal Commission report of 1980 (computed on the basis of the 1931 census) and 41% according to the National Sample Survey Organisation data of 2006.

The issue of representation remains relevant even today.

The MSCBC is currently reviewing 102 applications from various caste and sub-caste groups who are either seeking inclusion into the OBC category, or a change from one category of reservations to another.

Some of those who want to be classified as OBCs or Nomadic Tribes (NT) include groups such as Mullahs, Loni Marathas, Kshatriya Saini Marathas, Muslim Khelkari (Untawale), and Rana Rajputs. Some from the Brahmin community and the Gujarati Brahmin community have also sought OBC status; others within the OBC category want to be reshuffled into the Vimukta Jati (VJ) or NT categories for specific reservations.

“Maharashtra has some small and largely ignored castes and groups. They realised the benefits of reservations quite late. A gradual growth in literacy and social awareness made them understand the need for inclusion in the OBC category. It is their constitutional right to stake a claim for this. The MSCBC shall take a decision based on inferences drawn through field visits and surveys,” Hari Narke, activist and former member of the commission, said last month.

Following the March 4 order, the state has to conduct fresh surveys to understand the nature and implications of backwardness of communities in the state, even as it has sought to bring back some part of the reservation through the September Ordinance.

This gains urgency in light of the Centre’s recent refusal to provide information or data from the Socio Economic Caste Census conducted in 2011 — 80 years after the last caste census was conducted — citing errors. The Centre has also expressed its unwillingness to conduct another caste census.

“We want the state government to conduct a complete study of our representation from gram panchayat to Lok Sabha level vis-a-vis our population. The State Backward Class Commission is planning to conduct a survey to collect the empirical data. It should be done in a proper manner because Maratha reservation survey was not accepted by the apex court. The government should also explore further legal options to restore the reservation,” said Mrunal Dhole-Patil, a representative of the OBC Welfare Foundation, one of the petitioners before the Supreme Court.

The upcoming bypolls in six districts of Maharashtra will be conducted as non-reserved seats. But the fortunes of the ruling MVA coalition will rest on the upcoming local body elections starting next February, when more than 15 municipal corporations, 29 of 36 district councils and over 90 municipal councils will go for polls over the course of the year.

These elections are being touted as mini-assembly elections and will serve as a bellwether for the government and its opposition. Unlike Marathas, OBCs are a group of castes and not all prominent castes stick together in deciding whom to support. But the loss, even a partial one, of reservation could well band them together in a show of strength against or for a particular party.

The three parties could be forced to part ways if they suffer significant losses in the local elections. On the other hand, a better performance than the opposition BJP may pave the way for the three parties to stick together and maybe even contest the next assembly elections together.