(In the backdrop of the Andhra Pradesh High Court order (29th April) staying the implementation of the state law about 4% reservation to Muslims, Mumtaz Alam Falahi catches up with Aariz Mohammed, director, Centre for Minorities’ Empowerment to discuss the issue. Senior social activist Aariz Mohammed elaborates on reservation for Muslims, in its social and legal perspectives.)
Q: How do you see the 29th April Andhra Pradesh High Court order staying reservation for Muslims?
A: It’s a setback for the government which has been working to provide reservation to the Muslim community in the state for four years. On Tuesday, the seven-judge bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court passed the interim order on 4% Muslim reservation. In effect, the court order has stayed admissions to professional courses and employment under 4% quota for backward Muslims. The petitioners had argued that the Commission for Backward Classes had identified backward classes among the Muslim community without any scientific data. The final hearing will take place in the first week of July.
Q: Could you elaborate on the history of the efforts by the present Congress government in the state to provide reservation to Muslims who constitute, according to the 2001 census, 9.2% of the 77 million population?
A: It may be recalled that the High Court struck down the YS Rajasekhar Reddygovernment order that was meant to provide 5% reservation to Muslims. The court ruled that the Muslim quota cannot be accepted as the government did not take any
recommendation from the Andhra Pradesh Commission for Backward Classes. The government approached the Supreme Court which did not grant a stay on the High Court order. Consequently, the government referred the matter to the Commission, which recommended 4% quota for 13 categories of Muslims. The Commission recommendation was based on the report of P.S. Krishnan, special advisor to the government. He was assigned the task to prepare a report after first attempt of the state government for Muslim reservation was blocked by the High Court. Krishnan was part of the Mandal Commission also.
Q: What led to the 29th April decision of the High Court?
A: In the light of the Backward Commission recommendation supported by Krishnan report for 4% reservation to Muslims, the state government issued an ordinance to the effect. Later it converted the ordinance into law. That law was challenged in the High Court on the ground that the government created castes among the Muslim community only to give them reservation while there was no supporting data for the castes. It should be noted, however, that taking benefits of the quota, thousands of students got admissions into engineering, medical and other professional courses in 2006 and 2007.
Q: Do you support government’s move to give reservation to Muslims on the ground of castes?
A: No. This will run into the spirit of the Preamble of the Constitution which calls for social unity and integrity in the society. To create castes among the community which does not subscribe to caste-based society cannot be accepted. It’s unconstitutional as the objective of the Constitution is annihilation of Caste. Rather, Muslims should be given reservation on the ground of Backwardness
Q: Don’t you think this will also be against the letter and spirit of the Constitution?
A: Not at all. The Constitution does not say that reservation cannot be provided on the ground of religion but it says Religion of the community is not a hurdle in providing Affirmative action if the community is backward. In fact, Article 15 (1) and (4) does support to the provision. When reservation can be given on the ground of gender, caste and even region, what will happen if it is given on the ground of religion? Entire Lakshdweep comes under the category of ST. More than 93% of the population of the union territory is Muslim.