The phrase "Other Backward Class" is used by the Indian government to refer to castes that have social or educational disadvantages. Along with the General Class, Scheduled Castes, and Scheduled Tribes (SCs and STs), it is one of many legally accepted demographic classifications in India. OBCs made up 52% of the population in 1980, according to the Mandal Commission report; in 2006, the National Sample Survey Organisation said that OBCs made up 41% of the population.

The presence of OBCs in India is universally acknowledged, but many individuals feel that there are many more than the Mandal Commission or the National Sample Survey indicate. The Indian Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment maintains a dynamic list of OBCs, with castes and groups added and deleted based on social, educational, and economic reasons.

Introduction
Reservation in India generally refers to the practice of reserving seats in government offices, educational institutions, and even legislatures for specified groups of people. Affirmative action, sometimes known as reservations, may be deemed positive discrimination. The reservation policy of the Indian government is endorsed by the Indian Constitution. According to the Indian Constitution, the two primary goals of reserve are:

Advancement of Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) OR any socially and educationally disadvantaged groups of people (for example, OBC) OR economically disadvantaged sections (EWS) - Articles 15(4), 15(5), and 15(6).

Adequate representation of any underrepresented citizenship group OR economically disadvantaged sections (EWS) in state-run services. - Sections 16(4) and (16(6)).

Based on the Mandal Commission Report, the Other Backward Classes (OBC) Reservation was established in 1991. In government positions and higher education, the OBC quota is 27%. Nonetheless, the OBC reservation has a "creamy layer" notion. OBC reservations are only available to persons from the Non-Creamy Layer. By utilising social standing and money as criteria, the creamy layer idea excludes some of the more affluent OBC members from the full scope of quota. This notion also functions as a checkbox to guarantee that the advantages of reserving are not passed along to future generations.

Castes and groups may be added or removed from the National Commission for Backward Classes' OBC list at any moment based on social, educational, and economic considerations. According to the Constitution, the government is responsible for the social and educational development of OBCs, who are categorised as "socially and educationally backward classes."

Socially And Educationally Backward Classes In India

OBCs are referred to in the Indian Constitution as "socially and educationally backward classes (SEBCs)," and it is the Indian government's responsibility to assure their social and educational development. For example, in higher education and the public sector, OBCs enjoy a 27% quota. In reaction to social, educational, and economic factors, the Indian Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment frequently alters its list of OBCs by adding and eliminating castes and groupings. In response to a question in the Lok Sabha, Union Minister Jitendra Singh stated that as of January 2016, 21.57% of OBCs worked in central government positions, an increase from September 1993.

Previously, the Backward Classes Cell of the Ministry of Home Affairs was in charge of Backward Classes issues until 1985. A separate Ministry of Welfare was established in 1985 to manage concerns pertaining to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Classes (OBCs). In 1998, this ministry was renamed the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment.

Two organisations founded for the benefit of OBCs are the National Backward Classes Finance and Development Corporation and the National Commission for Backward Classes. The Backward Classes Division of the Ministry is in charge of OBC social and economic empowerment policy, planning, and programme execution.

Article 340 of the Indian Constitution requires the government to promote the welfare of the OBCs. 'By executive order, the President may appoint a commission of individuals he deems appropriate to investigate the SEBC's conditions within Indian territory, the difficulties they face, and to make recommendations regarding the actions that should be taken by the union or any state to address these difficulties, improve their condition, and determine the grants that should be made. A commission constituted in this manner is expected to investigate the issues raised and provide a report to the president including the material gathered as well as any recommendations they deem suitable.'

Demographics
Kalelkar Commission
Based on a combined sample of Schedule 1 and Schedule 10 data from the National Sample Survey Organisation's 55th (1999-2000) and 61st (2004-05) Round Surveys, the population distribution of each religion by caste type is displayed below.

The First Backward Classes Commission was established by presidential decree on January 29, 1953, and was led by Kaka Kalelkar. It reported on March 30, 1955. It generated a list of 2,399 backward castes or groupings for the entire country, with 837 categorised as the "most backward." Some of the most notable recommendations of the Kalelkar commission were:

• Conducting caste-based population enumeration in the 1961 census;
• Attributing social backwardness to a class's poor position in Indian society's traditional caste system;
• Labelling all women as a group as 'behind';

Reserving 70% of all technical and professional seats for talented students from underserved populations.

Reserved positions in all federal agencies and local governments for other disadvantaged groups.

The panel recommended that caste be utilised to measure backwardness in its final report. The government, on the other hand, rejected the report because it was concerned that those who needed help the most would be overwhelmed by the crowds and receive insufficient attention, and that underprivileged groups who were not included in the commission's caste and community selections would be overlooked.

Mandal Commission
The president took the formal decision to establish a second commission for the poor on January 1, 1979. In December 1980, B. P. Mandal, the head of the "Mandal Commission," published a report saying that the OBC community, which comprised both Hindus and non-Hindus, made up around 52% of the overall population. The Mandal Commission's initial list, prepared in 1979-1980, had 3,743 people from backward castes and groupings.

According to the National Commission for Backward Classes, the number of backward castes on the Central List of OBCs has now risen to 5,013 (without accounting for the bulk of Union Territories). Four of the Mandal Commission's eleven indicators or criteria for designating OBCs were economic in character.

According to the National Sample Survey, the percentage is 41%. In India, the number of OBCs is frequently debated, and census data has been corrupted by party politics. It is largely regarded to be substantial, but not as much as the Mandal Commission's or the National Sample Survey's statistics. Because the total number of bookings must not exceed 50%, only 27% of them were requested.

This advise will have no effect on states that currently have OBC reservations that cover more than 27% of the population. Along with this general proposal, the commission proposed the following OBC reservation scheme in its entirety:

• The OBC reserve quota of 27 percent should not be modified for OBC applicants chosen on merit in an open competition.
• The restriction outlined above should apply to all levels of promotion quotas.
• The unmet portions of the reserved quota must be carried over for three years before being de-reserved.
• The upper age limit for OBC candidates should be relaxed in the same way that it is for scheduled castes and scheduled tribes.
• Just like they do for applicants from scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, the appropriate authorities should create a roster system for each category of posts.

Following the guidelines in this article, public sector companies such as nationalised banks and those run by federal, state, and local governments may all enhance their hiring procedures. All privately held businesses that have received government financial support in any manner should be required to hire new employees in compliance with the aforementioned requirements.

The aforementioned reservation policy should be followed by all universities and connected institutions. Although "educational reform" fell beyond the committee's purview, education is nevertheless seen as a critical component in achieving the desired societal transformation. To promote literacy the following measures were suggested:

In areas with a high population of OBC residents, a comprehensive time-bound adult education strategy should be undertaken.

Residential schools for children from lower-income families should be developed there to provide an environment conducive to serious study. To attract students from lower-income and lower-class backgrounds, all amenities, including food and accommodation, should be offered free of charge in these institutions.

OBC students will require separate hostels with the aforementioned characteristics.

Vocational education was seen to be crucial
It was proposed that slots be set aside for OBC students in all federal and state-run academic, professional, and technical institutions. The reserve share should be 27%, the same as it is for government services. (Reservation in India, n.d.)

Legal Disputes
Creamy layer and Indra Sawhney vs Union of India
According to the 1975 decision NM Thomas v. State of Kerala, Justice Krishna Iyer stated, "I feel there are three difficulties pertaining to "reservation," in the "creamy layer." The creamy top layer of the 'backward' caste or class frequently takes use of its advantages, keeping the poor's most vulnerable weak and allowing the lucky layers to swallow the entire cake." The 1992 ruling in Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India, which affirmed the 50% quota restriction, stressed the idea of "social backwardness", and provided 11 metrics to measure it, established the boundaries of the state's authority. The idea of qualitative exclusion, such as "creamy layer," was also introduced by the ruling of the nine-judge panel.

Other Backward Castes are excluded from the creamy layer. SC and ST are not. The creamy layer threshold was set at Rs 100,000 in 1993, but was enhanced to Rs 250,000 in 2004, Rs 450,000 in 2008, and Rs 600,000 in 2013. In October 2015, the National Commission for Backward Classes proposed that an OBC person's family income should be at least Rs 1.5 million per year.

NCBC also proposed classifying OBCs as "backward," "more backward," and "extremely backward" and allocating 27% of the quota among them in accordance to their numbers to prevent stronger OBCs from monopolising quota benefits. (Other Backward Class, n.d.)

Supreme Court interim stay
On March 29, 2007, the Supreme Court of India temporarily suspended the statute awarding Other Backward Classes a 27% quota at IITs and IIMs. In response to the public interest case Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India, this was done. The Court held that the OBCs could not be acknowledged only on the basis of the 1931 census in order to create reservations. "Reservation cannot appear to perpetuate backwardness and be permanent," the Supreme Court declared.

Supreme Court verdict:
The Supreme Court of India affirmed the government's request to apply 27% OBC quotas at institutions receiving government grants on April 10, 2008. The Court has unequivocally reiterated its prior opinion that anyone considered to be a member of the "Creamy layer" shall be barred from participating in the reservation programme at both privately financed universities and government-supported institutions. People who supported and opposed the decision voiced opposing viewpoints.

Other criteria, such as the following, have been proposed for identifying the portion of the population that constitutes the "creamy layer":

Children from households earning more than $250,000 per year, $450,000 per year as of October 2008, and $800,000 per year as of this writing should be regarded as "creamy layer" and excluded from the reserve quota.

Lawyers, judges, Supreme Court justices, federal and state government employees in Class A and B, as well as doctors, engineers, chartered accountants, actors, consultants, media specialists, writers, bureaucrats, and defence officers with colonel or higher ranks, should be barred from participating.

The Court has requested Parliament to do the same for the children of MLAs and MPs.

Supreme Court conclusions from Ashoka Kumar Thakur vs. Union of India:
The Constitution (Ninety-third Amendment) Act of 2006 does not contradict the Constitution's 'fundamental structure' because it applies to state-maintained institutions and publicly supported educational institutions. In a suitable case, the question of whether the Constitution (Ninety-third Amendment) Act, 2006 is legally permissible in respect to 'private unaided' educational institutions would be determined.

One of the elements used to identify which classes are backward is the "creamy layer" concept. Because STs and SCs are distinct classes, the "creamy layer" idea cannot be applied universally to them.

Ideally, a review should be conducted every 10 years to account for any changes in conditions.

A graduate degree (rather than a technical diploma) or professional training.

OBCs can benefit from the creamy layer exclusion idea.

To strike a balance between racial discrimination and other social goals while maintaining high standards of excellence, the Central Government should consider establishing a cut-off point for applicants from Other Backward Classes (OBCs). This would ensure that the merit and quality of the work were not jeopardised. After such criteria are approved, any vacant seats will be filled by candidates from general categories.

The decision of the backward classes must be communicated to the Union of India. This can only be done when the creamy layer has been removed, and for that the Central Government must obtain the necessary data from the State Governments and Union Territories. Such a notification might be challenged on the basis of incorrect exclusion or inclusion.

When defining standards, it is essential to consider the distinct characteristics of the various states and union territories. Other backward classes (OBCs) must be correctly identified. The Commission established in accordance with this Court's orders in Indra Sawhney must function more efficiently and not merely consider recommendations for inclusion or exclusion when they are submitted as applications.

The Parliament should set a deadline for all children to have access to free and compulsory schooling. Because the right to free and compulsory education is arguably the most important of all basic rights, it must be implemented within six months (Art.21 A). Because exercising other essential rights without education is quite difficult.

The Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006 (No. 5 of 2007) requires the Central Government to make an appropriate determination as to whether the Institution deserves to be included in the Schedule based on the materials submitted and after taking into account the relevant issues. If evidence is presented demonstrating that the institution deserves to be included on the Schedule (a list of institutions that are not subject to reservations), the Central Government must make an appropriate decision in accordance with the guidelines.

SEBC identification does not violate Article 15(1) of the Constitution since SEBCs are not mainly acknowledged based on caste. (Constitutional Upliftment of Backward Classes)

Reservation And Upliftment Of SEBSs

It is the government's job in India to ensure equality of status and opportunity. One strategy for fighting social tyranny and injustice against certain communities is reservation. Reservation, sometimes known as affirmative action, contributes in the improvement of underserved communities.

Reservations, on the other hand, are only one option for societal improvement. Other alternatives include grants, coaching, scholarships, and other welfare efforts. In India, vote-bank politics determine how reservations are formed and enforced. According to the Indian Constitution, reservations were only available to socially and educationally disadvantaged communities. Caste-based reservation has largely replaced class-based reservation in India. (Why reservation is still necessary to uplift the depressed classes?, n.d.)

Over a 10-year period (1951-1961), the reserve was initially designed to help predominantly SC/ST people. However, it has since been extended. Following the Mandal Commission Report's adoption in 1990, the reservation's boundaries were expanded to include Other Backward Communities (OBCs). Few groups (or families) began to benefit from the reserve gradually, alienating the genuinely deserving. Reservations are still in high demand even 70 years after independence. Even if family income is a criterion, making reservations only on economic reasons is not the ideal solution.

Furthermore, rather than indefinitely extending the reservation system, a time limit must be specified. It is both immoral and illegal to deny eligible people access to India's services while others with less talent or academic accomplishment outperform them. The Indian reservation system must be changed immediately. Because the issue of reserve necessitates a large number of votes, parties are cautious to upset the status quo. (Reservation in India, n.d.)

Reservations in India aid in the abolition of previous injustices suffered by the country's disadvantaged castes. It also levels the playing field for the impoverished, who have been unable to compete with those who have had access to riches and resources for decades. It helps to ensure that backward classes are properly represented in state-run services. It is advantageous to the advancement of the impoverished groups. As the cornerstone of meritocracy, it ensures equality, which implies that all persons must be raised to the same level before being assessed on merit.

Conclusion
The Indian government is in charge of guaranteeing the social and educational progress of OBCs, who are referred to as "socially and educationally backward classes (SEBCs)" in the Indian Constitution. OBCs, for example, get a 27% quota in higher education and government posts. The Indian Constitution, in Article 340, compels the government to improve the welfare of the OBCs. According to B. P. Mandal, the head of the 'Mandal Commission,' the OBC community, which comprised both Hindus and non-Hindus, made up around 52% of the entire population in a December 1980 poll.

The 1992 verdict in Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India emphasised the state's power by upholding the 50% quota restriction, emphasising the concept of "social backwardness," and identifying 11 criteria to measure it. The nine-judge bench's decision also gave rise to the concept of qualitative exclusion, such as "creamy layer." It is critical to appropriately identify more backward classes (OBCs). The Commission, which was established in accordance with the orders of this Court in Indra Sawhney, must function more effectively and consider ideas for inclusion or exclusion outside of the context of applications.

Following the acceptance of the Mandal Commission Report in 1990, the reservation's limits were expanded to accommodate Other Backward Communities (OBCs). The reserve began to benefit only a few groups (or families), eventually alienating the genuinely worthy. Even 70 years after independence, reserves are still in great demand. Even if family money is a consideration, making reservations only for financial reasons is not the best option.

Reservations are being utilised to correct past injustices suffered by India's backward castes. Furthermore, it creates a level playing field for the poor, who have been unable to compete with those who have had access to riches and resources for decades. It helps to ensure that underprivileged groups are adequately represented in state-run programmes.

Bibliography:

1. (n.d.). Constitutional Upliftment of Backward Classes.
2. Other Backward Class. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Other_Backward_Class
3. Reservation in India. (n.d.). Retrieved from Dristi IAS: https://www.drishtiias.com/to-the-points/Paper2/reservation-in-india
4. Reservation in India. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-7730-reservation-in-india.html
5. Why reservation is still necessary to uplift the depressed classes? (n.d.). Retrieved from Ground Report: https://groundreport.in/why-reservation-is-necessary/

Written By:

1. Aishwarya Patil, 4th year
   Maharashtra National Law University, Aurangabad
    
2. Anubhab Haldar, 4th year
   Maharashtra National Law University, Aurangabad