Situating the Reservation Debate:
Some Signposts from Economic Theory

(Paper Submitted as part of Refresher course in Economics 5 December—26 December, 2006
Academic Staff College, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi)


The recent decision to set aside seats in the so-called islands of excellence in higher education to the socially backward classes and the apex court judgement on 16-10-2006 in the M. Nagaraj and others versus Union of India and others where in it pronounced about the validity of the Constitution (Eighty-Fifth Amendment) Act, 2001 inserting Article 16(4A) of the Constitution retrospectively from 17.6.1995 providing reservation in promotion with consequential seniority for SC/STs have opened the floodgates of criticism and counter criticism on the issue of reservation. The high-voltage campaign is kick started by the high profile and the most senior chief minister of the nation Mr. M. Karunanidhi by writing directly to all chief ministers and asking them to implead themselves in the reservation case before the nine judge constitutional bench of the apex court and decry even many of the opinions vented out by the judgement like reservation has to be used in a limited sense otherwise it will perpetuate casteism in the country etc. (The Hindu: 2006b). In this backcloth, even a cursory reading of the arguments from both sides points that, it is imperative to situate the reservation debate in its proper setting to draw appropriate conclusions. The paper is an attempt in that direction and is divided into six sections. The first section gives the main arguments from both sides and the judgement. This has been given to show the plane in which the core arguments of the debate are taking place. The second section deals with the concepts of equality, efficiency and the extent of reservation. It discusses the importance of proper initial state of distribution of income and resources for generating efficient outcomes. The third section delineates the nexus between equality and reservation in, public employment and centres of higher education and the fourth section briefly discusses the external benefits of reservation. The fifth section examines the issue of reservation and the ‘fear’ of de-secularisation and the final section gives the concluding remarks.

1 The Plane of Reservation and the Nagaraj Case

1.1 Arguments supporting Reservation

A number of weighty arguments are advanced from various quarters to posit the case for reservation in higher education and employment. However, all can be encapsulated in a single argument that it is the duty of the state to dispense social justice to the socially and educationally backward classes given the age-old discriminatory and exploitative regimes that rendered a large section of the populace downtrodden and depressed. Furthermore, set against the view that preferential treatment on the basis of caste, that too in promotion violates the concept of equality which is a basic feature of the constitution, it is highlighted that the concepts flowing from the preamble to the Constitution alone constitute the basic structure; that, basic structure is not found in a particular Article of the Constitution; and except the fundamental right to live in Article 21 read with Article 14 , no particular Article in Part-III is a basic feature and wherefore equality mentioned in Articles 14 and 16 is not to be equated to the “equality” which is a basic feature of the Constitution. Put otherwise, equality of opportunity in matters related public employment as given by Article 16 and equality before law as given by Article 14 cannot be equated to the equality mentioned in the preamble to the constitution which is a basic feature of the constitution. Hence preferential treatment in matters of public employment both in initial recruitment and promotion, that too with consequential seniority is well within the pale of constitution and seldom violates the basic structure or results in reverse discrimination.

1.2 Arguments against Reservation

Equality is a part of the basic structure and it is impossible to conceive of the Constitution without equality as one of its central components and it is the basic feature referred to in the preamble to our Constitution. Hence Article 16(1) is integral to equality that, Article 16 has to be read with Article 14 and with several Articles in Part-IV.

It is further argued that equality of opportunity cannot be overruled by affirmative action. Moreover, “equality in employment" consists of equality of opportunity [Article 16(1)], anti-discrimination [Article 16(2)] , special classification [Article 16(3)] , affirmative action [Article 16(4)] which does not obliterate equality but which stands for classification within equality, and lastly, efficiency [Article 335] . What distils down is any affirmative action taken must be in ‘balance’ with the equality and efficiency clauses wherein it highlights the fact that affirmative action has only a limited work space. In other words, there is a conflict between the affirmative action and equality and efficiency and wherefore they must be properly balanced. By balance they mean that there should not be any consequential seniority in promotion or breach of 50 % limit for reservation.

1.3 The Judgement of Apex Court

Firstly, the apex court observed that there can be no rule of law if there is no equality before the law and the rule of law and equality before the law are designed to secure among other things justice both social and economic which is mentioned in the preamble to the constitution. Secondly, Article 14 confers rights which are elementary for the proper and effective functioning of democracy. So "equality" is the essence of democracy. Considering both these aspects the court observed that "equality" is a basic feature of the Constitution. Furthermore, the concept of ‘public employment’ is socialistic and therefore, also falls within the preamble to the Constitution.

The court observed that the claim of individual right under Article 16(1) with which the general class seeks equity and the preferential treatment given to a backward class [Article 16(4)] through which the backward classes seek justice is conflicting. Moreover Article 16(4) has a limitation in the form of Article 335. Hence these conflict and limitation are to be balanced and in this context the extent of reservation comes in to the picture.

The court found that, the impugned amendments consider all these requirements and do not obliterate any of the constitutional requirements flowing from them namely the ceiling-limit of 50% for maintaining ‘balance’ (quantitative limitation), the concept of creamy layer (qualitative exclusion) etc. The compelling reasons namely backwardness, inadequacy of representation and the overall administrative efficiency are also not obliterated by the impugned amendments. With these remarks the court upheld the validity of the amendments. Further it observed that since the constitutional requirements and the compelling reasons are not violated the structure of equality of opportunity in Article 16 does not collapse.

However regarding the question of reservations in promotions for SCs and STs the court observed that in each case the Court has got to be satisfied by placing before it the requisite quantifiable data and satisfy the Court that such reservations became necessary on account of inadequacy of representation of SCs/ STs in a particular class or classes of posts without affecting general efficiency of service as mandated under Article 335 of the Constitution.

1.4 Other Arguments

There are many arguments which point out that caste based backwardness is not the only of backwardness and there exist other forms of ‘disadvantages or deprivation’ and hence there should not be any policy design that consider only caste-religion based backwardness (Economic Times: 2006), (Pant: 2006), (Deshpande and Yadav: 2006). But it seems that they all missed the woods for the trees. If there are other forms of backwardness that have the same degree to that of caste-religion based backwardness then the policy prescription is not to summarily reject the caste based quota policy but to include them too on a case by case approach. Furthermore, Pappu et. al. (2006c) discerned that the shift in emphasis from discrimination to deprivation is a terminological obfuscation by positing that “affirmative action" is tantamount to "reservation." They argued that affirmative action in the U.S and our reservation policy must be differentiated as the policy objectives of both are rather different and addresses different problems. Affirmative action in the U.S. is meant for a numerical minority whereas in India the sections contending for the provision of reservation were and are a numerical majority. They rightly pointed out that the poor are not a marginalised community but an economic class where as the "lower castes" in India on the other hand are marginalised communities. So the discussion is back to the stage where the apple of discord is the conflict between the equality and social justice through reservation.

2 Equality, Efficiency and the Extent of Reservation:
Conflict or Consonance?

It is to be noted that the court accepted the view taken by the petitioners and a large section of people who oppose reservation in public employment and higher education that there exist a conflict between Article 16(1), 16(4) and 335 and hence a proper balance must be maintained. Nonetheless there is nothing new in it and the 50 % limit for reservation, in whatever circumstances, spring from the keenness to keep this balance between the conflicting concepts of equality, justice and efficiency.

The natural question arises is if a state is so backward that 80 % its population comprises of backward classes, then whether sticking to the
50 % limit for reservation is logical or not. The state of Tamil Nadu follows this question and says that its backward class population is more than 70 % and so it gives 69 % of reservation to them. But given the various pronouncements of the apex court, 50 % limit cannot be breached and so it took shelter in the Ninth Schedule [Article 31(B)] of the constitution and put the legislation for
69 % reservation in it with a view to keeping it out of the pale of judicial review. The nine judge constitution bench now examine this practice of overpopulating the ninth schedule.

It is certain that the constitution bench would declare that the practice of overpopulating the Ninth Schedule with the objective of keeping legislations out of judicial review is invalid given the views of court as expressed in various judgements including the above said case where it opined that even though it would be meaningless to say that reservation should not cross 50 %, if a state has 80 % backward class population, it has to take into account the majority view in the Indra Sawhney case where it held that the rule of 50 % laid down in the Balaji case was a binding rule and not a mere rule of prudence and is compatible with equal opportunity for all.

2.1 Reservation and Resource: Signposts from Economic Theory

But it is to be noted that, as observed by the apex court and highlighted by others, as a matter of fact; there is no conflict between the concepts of equality, justice and efficiency as given in Articles 16(1), 16(4) and 335 respectively. If there is no conflict between them then there is no need to maintain any balance!

It is now well settled that equality of opportunity which is in fact egalitarian equality is a basic feature of the constitution and is vital to the functioning of democracy. Mere equality of opportunity is meaningless unless it is backed with resources enough to enable an individual to benefit from it. If a particular section of people have deficiency with respect to certain resources that are required to take benefit from the right to equality of opportunity in matters of public employment ensured by Article 16(1), a mere conferment of equality of opportunity will not deliver any benefit at all and would become hollow and useless. Since this situation stems from the absence of resources it can be surmounted through the provision of deficient resources. But if the relevant resource basket to be provided comprises of human capital or social and cultural background then it cannot be supplied all on a sudden and takes much time for its dispensation. If the society prefers to wait till then, suffice to say, up to that time there will not be any sort of equality in public employment. Furthermore, this will in turn create repercussions in many spheres of public life and would spread the message that the state is not concerned with the issue of equality in public space. In short, absence of equality in public employment would be seen as absence of equality in public sphere. Hence it becomes imperative to the state to ensure equality in public employment.

2.1.1 Allocation of resources and the State of Distribution

In the classic text book on Public Economics, renowned economist Musgrave (1959:17) while formulating the multiple theory of public household, argued that the budget of allocation branch can be formulated only on the assumption that there exits a desired or proper state of distribution to begin with. Unless the state of distribution is given, individuals cannot translate their preferences into patterns of effective demand. Thus unless the initial sate of distribution of income is proper, the resulting pattern of effective demand cannot be taken as a guide for efficient use of resources or the resulting allocation of resources will not be an efficient one.

Musgrave further pointed out that even in a market economy, distribution of income and wealth depends upon a number of factors including the laws of inheritance, the distribution of innate talents, the availability of educational opportunities, social mobility and the structure of markets. If the so-called efficient markets are so influenced by such a variety of social factors, their influence would be so decisive in a society that has a fractured structure where discrimination on the basis of caste etc was well entrenched over ages. Viewed from this angle, it is imperative to the state to intervene in the society to bring proper state of distribution of income and wealth by removing the factors that engender inequality like absence of basic resources for any economic activity, unequal opportunity in education, absence of social and cultural capital, unequal distribution of innate talents, social mobility etc as accentuated by Musgrave (1959:17). He further punctuated the importance of ‘equality of opportunity’ (1959:19) in determining the proper state of distribution as welfare based measures or concepts will result in uneven distribution of income which hardly corresponds to the commonly understood meaning of equality. In short, economic theory says that there must be a proper state of distribution of income and wealth to begin with. With out that the resulting allocation of resources will be not become an efficient one. Besides, the proper state of distribution of income and wealth is judged on the basis of ‘equality of opportunity’ and is determined by the availability of educational opportunities, social mobility etc.

Viewed from this backdrop, the purpose of Article 16(4), which ensures reservation, becomes translucent. The state wants to ensure equality in all spheres of public life and not ready to wait till it is achieved through its natural way. The enthusiasm of the state to maintain equality in public life is manifested and amplified in the inclusion of Article 16(4). For this reason there exist no conflict between Article 16(1) and 16(4) and hence no need to maintain balance between them.

Once the notion of conflict between the Articles and the consequent maintenance of balance are made not relevant, the limit on the extent of reservation tends to depend upon the numerical strength of the section of people to whom reservation is given. As a sequel, a high proportion of backward classes eclipses the 50 % limit to reservation.

In this backcloth it is instructive to learn the observations of the court made in the Nagaraj case against proportionate reservation. It quotes the judgement of Reddy, J. in the Indra Sawhney case where it noted that Article 16(4) speaks of adequate representation not proportionate representation although proportion of population of backward classes to the total population would certainly be relevant (emphasis added). Admittedly, the Article 16(4) speaks of adequate representation but in any case if it comes below proportionate representation by the same extent it will deny benefits to the needy people and would badly derange, that ‘equality of opportunity’ it painstakingly attempted to shelter!

Reservation per se will not compromise efficiency unless matched with relaxation in minimum requirements. In addition, efficiency depends upon the set of skills and other resources required for a task and how best they are utilised to produce the desired results. Even if there is a relaxation in the minimum requirement the expected loss of efficiency can be bridged by giving tailor-made and customised training programmes if the society is so keen to maintain equality in opportunity. In the light of these, efficiency requirements as given in Article 335 does not seem to be a limiting factor to extend the extent of reservation in relevant cases.

3 Reservation in Higher Education

3.1 The Importance of Equality

Elsewhere it is mentioned that certain remarks by the apex court in the Nagaraj case judgement attracted protest from different quarters. One such remark is its advice that the State will have to see that its reservation provision does not lead to extend the reservation indefinitely. Implied in these protests and in the advise of apex court, is both party’s eagerness to maintain equality of opportunity, though in a different way, that the court which wants a balance between equality and justice feels that the long continuation of reservation would undermine equality where as the protesters feel that in the social milieu of continuing discrimination any discontinuation of reservation scuttles down their prospect in achieving equality in opportunity!

As pointed out earlier, mere equality of opportunity is meaningless unless it is backed with resources enough to enable an individual to benefit from it. The crucial one among those resources is the resources embodied in the form of human capital and is chiefly provided by education. The provision of higher education to all sections of the society assumes added importance in this context. Needless to say, the unequal distribution of educational opportunities across sections of the society, adversely affects the prospects of poorly endowed classes. Denial of proper access to the centres of higher learning prompts the deprived classes to adopt the natural recourse strategy to maintain equality by seeking reservation for long periods. Once the educational attainment of the backward classes becomes comparable to that of the privileged classes they would certainly realise that reservation is decreasingly important for maintaining equality in opportunity. Backward class members who possess good educational qualifications openly declare that they do not need reservation any more and media is abounding with their stories and revelations. In short, the discussion inches to the inescapable point that reservation to the backward classes in centres of excellence in higher education is decisive to the achievement of equality in opportunity.

3.2 The Magnified Prospect of Threat

All the arguments painstakingly yet deliberately woven to thwart the reservation attempts to the so-called centres of excellence in higher education are remarkably brittle when set against the simple facts of the case. The argument that reservation candidates would largely dilute the quality of these excellent institutes may deceive many but the fact remains that it is not the quality of students alone that build excellence but the academic practises and the innovative attempts that mark an institute make it a class apart. Some administrators of these institutes say that reservation candidates could not complete the course with in the stipulated period and they would eventually become a drag upon the system. But it is to be reminded that excellence of an institution does not lie in cornering good placements with good students alone rather repeating such stellar performances with different categories of students in different situation. This is not like asking to produce high quality automotive steel from low grade ore and a distinction must be drawn between the process of education and the mechanical production function.
A number of tools and techniques of education are available to deal with different categories of students having different cognitive skills and academic ability and they are capable to churn out desired results for any institute. Imaginative educational designs can certainly produce satisfactory results and excellence in higher education encompasses these aspects also. Furthermore, all these institutions already have a reservation policy for SC/STs hence what damage could be done additionally to these institutions by the inclusion of better endowed students from other backward classes, intriguingly difficult to understand. Moreover, Ram Mohan (2006) pointed out that the dilution in quality due to reservation is far less than is commonly supposed. In similar vein Ghosh (2006) argued that merit is an alibi for preserving the brahminical status quo where access to and control over knowledge and institutions is restricted to an elite minority.

The discussion distils down to the fact that the prospect of threat magnified by the various interest groups to the higher education sector in the wake of reservation is not that much serious to keep it outside the pale of possible corrective measures. Besides, it is to be remembered that reservation in higher education is only a corollary of the endeavour to maintain equality of opportunity in public sphere.

4 External Benefits of Reservation in Public Employment

4.1 Virtues of Democracy and Efficient Outcomes

The multidimensional benefits of providing access to the backward classes in public employment are not well understood especially in reinforcing the democratic elements and producing efficient outcomes in the public sphere. The more visible and direct benefits like permanent employment, income, pension, status etc are not the only benefits. Apart from these individual specific benefits there are “external benefits” that are decisively important in fortifying virtues of democracy and ensuring efficient outcomes by obliterating monopolistic tendencies from the public sphere. To establish a democratic republic, democracy in election process alone is not enough and it must be extended to all spheres of public life. Policy making must be an open process and it is a well settled fact that bureaucracy at all levels exerts their own varying influence in the process.

All the available data shows that public employment at all levels are lopsided and majority are from the privileged class. It is a well accepted fact that their caste considerations play a crucial role in the process of policy, decision and opinion making, though in a very subtle way. Recall the recent anti-reservation protests by a small group and the more than proportionate coverage they received in the national media both print and electronic. A survey (Hindu: 2006a) later found that Hindu upper caste men who form 8 % of country’s population hold 71 % of the top jobs in the national media. Need any more explanation for the high media coverage for the anti-reservation protest?

In this backdrop, to curb the monopolistic behaviour of the privileged class it is important to give access to all sections. Access to policy and decision making process will be greatly enhanced if there is proper representation especially in public employment. Increased participation of all sections/groups of the society in the policy, decision and opinion making process will also root out the monopolistic interests and there by bring about competitive elements which could alone secure efficient outcomes to the society.

4.2 Determinants of Efficient Outcomes

It is pertinent to identify the determinants of efficient outcomes in the process of policy and decision making in the public sphere. It is to be noted that decisions taken by efficient persons or through efficient channels/mechanisms may not be necessarily the efficient outcomes to the society as whole. There must be a distinction between efficient outcomes and efficiency of the channel that produces those outcomes. It seems that discussion on efficiency often centres on the latter aspect. But economic theory says that efficient outcomes are that outcomes which turn out from a competitive bidding process. If different sections of the society are not allowed to participate in the process with equal status then the dominant group would exhibit monopolistic behaviour and however efficient the monopolistic players, the process miserably fail to generate efficient outcomes from the view point of the society. Thus it is the extent of representation and the engagement of different sections of the society in the process that determine efficient outcomes. The case of British rule highlights this fact and we know that it was carried out by exceptionally efficient persons through efficient administrative set up with good governance but pathetically failed to generate best outcomes to the society! What boils down is that all sections of the society must be given proper rather than name sake representation for cultivating democratic practices and securing efficient outcomes in public sphere.

5 Reservation and Secularism

Many of the arguments against reservation in higher education are raised only to create more obscurity and confusion and to deceive even right thinking people. The argument that (Mahajan: 2006) caste based reservations would result in de-secularisation of the society or take away the secular content is one among them and emanates from the objective to create a smoke screen and to divert the issue at core. It only manifest pathological fear and slight over the fact of the matter that reservations are not aimed to strengthen the caste system but to help the hapless people to move out from the yoke of caste apparatus by amply displaying the undeniable fact that they can also think and perform equally well as compared to the so-called robotically efficient privileged class provided they get adequate opportunity. Accordingly reservation on the basis of caste will eventually derange the well entrenched notions and symbols of caste system there by attenuate the importance of caste difference in the society. It may take time and in the interregnum period might result in caste solidarity, but it is certain that in the long run such caste consciousness would come down remarkably as and when they acquire equal status in the society. As like the reservation given on the basis of gender does not embed gender divisions rather winds down gender discrimination, reservation given on the basis of caste also will not fortify caste divisions in the long run and wherefore does not result in the de-secularisation of the society, the fears otherwise are simply surrealistic!

6 Recapitulation


The study attempts to situate properly, the reservation debate in its appropriate setting. The study is conducted in the context where the reservation debate took a dramatic turn when high voltage campaign is initiated by senior politicians and the apex court is started to hear in a constitution bench, the validity of certain reservation related legislations and the hearing is generally perceived as the precursor for another batch of litigations regarding reservation in higher education. The study briefly discussed the recent judgement in the Nagaraj case by pointing out the various arguments from both sides. The discussion highlighted that it is the need to strike an appropriate balance between the conflicting concepts of equality, justice and efficiency that became the cornerstone for the apex court judgement.

However the study punctuated the fact that it is the equality of opportunity that is more important and there is no conflict between equality of opportunity, the cry for justice and efficiency in administrative services. Accordingly the issue of extent of reservation may be settled by considering the numerical strength of the eligible classes.

As a matter of fact reservation to centres of higher education is only a corollary of equality of opportunity. Moreover the achievement of equality even through reservation generates efficient outcomes to the society and there must be a need to make a distinction between efficiency of the channel and efficient outcomes.
[This is revised version of the paper contributed to “National Seminar on Sociology in 21st Century” November 16-17, 2006, B.S.A. College, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh. The usual caveats apply notwithstanding.]

Visit at www.santhoshtv.in


7 REFERENCES

1. Despande, Satish and Yadav, Yogendra (2006) ‘Redesigning Affirmative Action Castes and Benefits in Higher Education’, Economic and Political Weekly, June 17, 2006, Pg 2419-2424
2. Economic Times (2006), ‘No more quotas: Needed, Intelligent Policy Intervention, Chennai Edition, 11-04-206, Pg 8.
3. Ghosh, Pothik (2006), ‘The ghost in the quota machine’, Economic Times, Chennai Edition, 17-04-206, Pg 10.
4. Mahajan, Gurpreet (2006), ‘It will trigger de-secularisation of society’, Economic Times, Chennai Edition, 12-04-206, Pg 10.
5. Musgrave, R. A. (1959), ‘The Theory of Public Finance: A study in Public Economy’, (New York: McGraw Hill)
6. Panchamuki (2006), ‘Reflections on Globalisation and Social Development’, Keynote address to the 5th Refresher Course in Economics, UGC Academic Staff College, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, 5 Dec to 26 Dec, 2006.
7. Pant, Manoj (2006), ‘A Workable Formula ’, Occasional Papers in Economic Times, Chennai Edition, 16-06-206, Pg 8.
8. Pappu, Rekha et. al. (2006), ‘Reservation or affirmative action?’, The Hindu, New Delhi Edition, 12,December,2006.
9. Ram Mohan, T. T. (2006), ‘Costs and benefits of quotas’, Economic Times, Chennai Edition, 24-04-206, Pg 8.
10. The Hindu: (2006a) ‘Uppercaste dominate national media, says survey in Delhi’, Kochi Edition, Monday, June 5.
11. The Hindu: (2006b) ‘All States must implead themselves in the reservation case: Karunanidhi’, Kochi Edition, Thursday, October 26.


ENDNOTES

[1] It also considers the validity the Constitution (Eighty-First Amendment) Act, 2000 inserting Article 16(4B) but is not given emphasis here.

[2] It is the seniority that the reservation candidate enjoys in the promoted post over the general category candidate once he catches-up.

[3] 21. Protection of life and personal liberty.—No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

[4] 14. Equality before law.—The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.

[5] 16. Equality of opportunity in matters of public employment.—(1) There shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State.

[6] 16 (2) No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence or any of them, be ineligible for, or discriminated against in respect of, any employment or office under the State.

[7] 16 (3) Nothing in this article shall prevent Parliament from making any law prescribing, in regard to a class or classes of employment or appointment to an office under the Government of, or any local or other authority within, a State or Union territory, any requirement as to residence within that State or Union territory prior to such employment or appointment.

[8] 16 (4) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens which, in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State.

[9] 335. Claims of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes to services and posts.—The claims of the members of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes shall be taken into consideration, consistently with the maintenance of efficiency of administration, in the making of appointments to services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State:
Provided that nothing in this article shall prevent in making of any provision in favour of the members of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes for relaxation in qualifying marks in any examination or lowering the standards of evaluation, for reservation in matters or promotion to any class or classes of services or posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State.

[10] Since equality is the basic feature of the Constitution and any treatment of equals as unequals or any treatment of unequals as equals violates the basic structure of the Constitution.

[11] As consequential seniority in promotion has been limited to SC/STs only.

[12] M. Nagaraj and others versus Union of India and others: October, 2006.

[13] Indra Sawhney versus Union of India: November, 1992 (the Mandal case).

[14] M.R. Balaji vs. State of Mysore: 1963.

[15] Resources include education, skills, social and cultural background etc. Moreover, Panchamuki (2006) urged that participant teachers from remote locations must somehow shed their feeling of ‘diffidence’ as they are also capable to compete with anybody who hails from a advantageous location, in fact, broadly refers to the social and cultural capital.
[16] But he argued that by making transparent the costs and benefits of quotas should help evolve a policy that is acceptable as much to the disadvantaged groups as to those who see themselves as losers.

[17] But he took a cautious view regarding the desirability of reservation.

[18] Also called as positive externalities and are benefits available to the society but transmitted out of the market mechanism.

[19] During the months of June and July of 2006 and at New Delhi.