| Published on 14-04-2007 In National |
| Viewed 1625 times |
|
Written by
Cho Ramaswamy |
Karnataka government's ignoring rulings of the courts' in the Cauvery tangle is unjust. The Kerala regime's brazen contempt for judgements in the Mullaperiyar issue is the worst example of chutzpah. But, the Tamil Nadu has attempted to do something worse against the Supreme Court by organising a general strike against its interim pronouncement because it is supposed to be "social justice."
The Apex Court had spoken its mind in the matter of 27 percent reservation for "Other Backward Castes" in higher education and ordered an interim stay on the law in this respect. Though the TN government opposed and decried the ruling as do most political parties in the length and breadth of the nation, this is the only state that dovetailed its allies' [and the entire opposition's] support for a state sponsored "bandh."
Senior counsel Vijayan has pointed out a hitherto unnoticed aspect of this issue.
"When the case came up for the first time, its plaintiffs – a certain youths' association was in the process of organising a strike. The Supreme Court's interim orders, at that point in time, were in favour of the government which had opposed it. Forced to accept the call of the courts, the body called off its mass action. Now, the state government has acted in a manner so as to insult the voice of the judiciary. Shouldn't the present regime exhibit the same sense of responsibility shown earlier by a voluntary organisation," Vijayan demands to know.
The Supreme Court expressed itself explicitly while ordering an interim stay in the matter of reservation in education.
The court reiterated its earlier orders which had clearly stated that the reservations cannot exceed 50 percent…This upper limit [aimed to keep out] the creamy layer within the Backward Castes was an aspect of the [collective] wisdom expressed in the articles enshrined in The Constitution. If breached, this would defeat the very purpose of the assurance of "equal opportunities" which are the bedrock of all our laws, the court said. Ensuring that reservations do not go beyond the prescribed 50 percent limit, that all those who have already been benefited by the statute are kept beyond its purview and prevention of their indefinite continuance are the duty of the government. Backwardness cannot be a permanent feature and therefore ought not to become endless, the court reflected in its interim order.
These above sentiments expressed by the courts have been stressed in many articles published several times in Thuglak.
This time, the Supreme Court has pointed out that the census of 1931 cannot be the basis to determine OBCs. Further it said that such an old yardstick cannot be accepted as the justification for 27 percent reservation in [central] educational institutions.
Those who oppose these averments of the Apex Court naturally point to the fact that it did not question reservations in government jobs. But these sections have failed to comprehend a simple facet of the whole issue. Different articles in the Constitution have dealt with reservations in jobs and educational institutions separately and have differentiated between the two.
While tackling the matter of reservations in jobs, the Constitution clearly says they are applicable only "to those Backward Classes which do not have adequate representation."
Shorn of legalese, this means that the founding fathers of our Constitution had accepted the fact that certain sections of the population weren't represented in government posts.
But the statute doesn't accept this premise while dealing with the issue of reservations in educational institutions. The article that deals with this matter clearly says that the special arrangement is meant for the uplift of "socially and educationally backward sections" of the population that encompasses "oppressed and scheduled castes [and] tribes…"
Since this was based on the situation that prevailed in 1931 [when the last census was conducted] questions are bound to be raised about its present applicability.
If this distinction between jobs and education is understood, nobody would say that the two are on an equal plane.
Between the creation of our Constitution and the present day, different amendments were made to include several sections in the populace purely to increase political parties' vote banks. This resulted in those who depended on merit being totally outnumbered in blatant violation of the tenets of equality stated clearly in the Constitution.
Every time the courts opposed such moves, political parties assailed the judiciary as a matter of habit. The present order of the Supreme Court isn't a final denouement. Yet, several political outfits are condemning it as such. The Tamil Nadu government simply went a step further and organised a "bandh."
"On what basis can the ruling party in Tamil Nadu insist on our obeying the Supreme Court in the Cauvery and Mullaperiyar issues," is a poser bound to be raised by the ruling [coalitions] in Karnataka and Kerala respectively.
Naturally the two "K" states can demand the right to be on an equal footing with Tamil Nadu in ignoring the Supreme Court!
On several occasions, for different reasons, the powers that be in many states as well as at the centre have accorded short shrifts to judgements pronounced in courts. At times, they have rendered their orders meaningless by amending the laws.
It may happen on this occasion as well.
The words of the judiciary have tasted bitter to governments regardless of their being regional or national because the courts base their orders on the Constitution while ruling political arrangements treaded a different measure due to political conveniences.
The latest imbroglio is an attempt on the part of the political parties to decimate the bulwarks of democracy enshrined in our laws – equality and justice for all. If the political class succeeds in its quest, it would be meaningless to call ourselves a democratic state. The alibi for this – the cause of "social justice" – is its very antithesis.
(Translated from Thuglak by TSV Hari)
|
|
|
|
|
| Social Web |  |
| |
|
|
| |
Processing please wait ...
Top Stories
