ABSTRACT
Reservation in promotions and consequential seniority for Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC) in India has sparked intense debate. This article explores the historical background, judicial developments, arguments for and against, and a potential Rawlsian solution to this contentious issue.
The Indian Constitution’s provisions for affirmative action (Articles 15(4) and 16(4)) aim to correct historical injustices and promote social equality. Landmark judgments (M. Nagaraj, Jarnail Singh, and B.K. Pavitra) have shaped the legal framework. Proponents argue that reservations ensure representation, social justice, and constitutional compliance. Opponents claim reservations undermine meritocracy, efficiency, and perpetuate caste divisions.
This article proposes a Rawlsian solution, inspired by John Rawls’ Theory of Justice. The “Original Position” concept imagines a society where individuals, unaware of their social status, agree on principles ensuring fairness and equality. Applying this to India, the state could provide equal access to education and opportunities, rendering reservations obsolete.
KEY WORDS: Reservation, Consequential Seniority, Historical Injustice, Original Position
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”
-Thomas Jefferson1
Introduction
Reservation in promotions and consequential seniority for Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC) in India has been a subject of intense debate for decades. The concept of affirmative action in India traces its roots to the post-colonial era, aimed at correcting the historical injustices and inequalities suffered by marginalized communities. However, the policy’s implementation in promotions and its impact on seniority has raised several constitutional, social, and legal questions. This issue remains contentious due to conflicting views on equality, efficiency, and social justice.