the first backward class commission was …youthforequality.com/affirmative-actions/development...

Development of Backward Classes’ list in Karnataka

Till November 1, 1956, the State of Mysore treated all castes and communities , except Brahmins, Anglo-Indians and Europeans, as backwards.

After reorganization of states in 1956, a Government Order was issued in July 1958 declaring all caste and communities, except Brahmins, to be Backward.

This GO was quashed by the High Court.

In 1959, another G.O. was issued stating that all caste and communities except Brahmins, Baniyas, Kshatriyas, Kayasthas, Muslims, Christians, and Jains were backward.

This G.O. was also quashed by the High Court.

The State Government appointed ‘Mysore Backwardc Class Committee’ under Chairmanship of Nagna Gowda.

Nagna Gowda.Committee

The Committee used three criteria for the purpose of identifying socially and educationally backward people as well as those deserving representation in government service:

a) Social backwardness of castes in relation to hierarchical status.

b) Educational Backwardness

c) The proportion of representation in government service.

The Committee used the state average percentage of students of different castes and communities studying in the last three years of high school in 1959-60 as the educational criterion. Those castes whose percentage of such students was below the state average percentage (7%) were classified as educationally backward.

Based on the above criterion following important castes were excluded from the list of socially and educationally backward classes:

Caste/community

Number of students of each caste/community per thousand population

Darzi 8.2Kshatriya 22.3Lingayat 7.1Mudaliar 19.2Rajput 8.3Nayar 7.4Kodaga 47.2Christians 18.4Jains 14.1Bhunts 9.0

(Mysore Backward Classes Committee: Final Report, 1961,pp.43-44.)

Employment

www.youthforequality.com 1

Total Number of State Government employees in 1959: 148,686

Total estimated population of the State in 1960: 12,147,300

Adequacy of representation of different castes:

Caste/Community

Percentage of the total population of the State

Percentage of State Govt Employees from each caste to the total employees of the State

Banajiga 1.58 1.77Kshatriya 0.37 1.35Lingayat 15.57 12.4Mahratta 4.08 3.01Mudali(ar) 0.53 1.49Neygi 0.67 0.76Rajput 0.21 0.22Vokkaliga 12.98 10.66Nayar 0.12 0.33Kodaga 0.27 1.21Non-Hindu Religion

12.91 20.36

(Mysore Backward Classes Committee: Final Report, 1961,pp.41, 45-6.)

Summary Recommendation of Committee:

Number of castes

Population (as per centage of the State population)

Reservation Recommended for backwards

For the purpose of Article 15(4)

214 57% 50%

For the purpose of Article 16(4)

185 45% 45%

Other important features of the Committee:

1. The Committee also recommended that this reservation policy should be reviewed after ten years. Castes and communities which show an improvement in their educational status and representation in government service may be removed from the list after such a review.

2. The committee made special mention about the social status of Lingayats and said:

“Lingayats- the committee is of the opinion that the entire Lingayat Community is socially forward.

Developments following Nagna Gowda Committee

The State government passed three orders implementing the recommendations of the Nagna Gowda Committee Report. The first order was issued in 1960 implementing the recommendations of the Interim Report. The second order was issued in 1961 implementing the recommendations of the Final Report. As the Committee had not included the politically most influential caste group (LINGAYATS), the Government was brought under heavy pressure. To include Lingayats, the State average was raised by 0.1% ( i.e. from 7.0% to 7.1%). This would show that Lingayats were educationally not advanced,. www.youthforequality.com 2

And their inclusion in Backward list was justified. Accordingly, a new GO was passed in 1962 including LINGAYATS.

Both the 1961 and 1962 GOs were struck down by the High Court. In response to State Government’s appeal, the Supreme Court ( Balaji vs State of Mysore AIR 1963 SC 649) struck down the GO which was based on the Nagna Gowda Committee’s report on the ground that caste had been made the sole basis for determining backwardness. The Court also held that reservation which was as high as 68% was excessive and that the maximum should have been 50%.

Post Balaji Period

As a result of the decision of the Supreme Court in Balaji”s Case, the Government of Karnataka wholly abandoned the basis of caste and , pending an elaborate study and investigation of the problem which would take a long time, decided as and interim measure to classify backwardness on the basis of(1) economic condition, (2) occupation (3)social backwardness.

According to that order a family whose income is Rs. 1,200 per annum or less and persons or classes following occupations of agriculture petty business, inferior services, crafts or other occupations involving manual labour, are in general, socially economically and educationally backward. The Government lists the following occupations as contributing to social backwardness:

1. actual cultivator;

2. artisan;

3. petty businessmen;

4. inferior services (i.e., Class IV in Government services and corresponding class or service in private employment) including casual labour; and

5. any other occupation involving manual labour.

This GO was challenged in the High Court (Viswanath vs Govt of Mysore AIR 1964, Mysore, 132) and subsequently in the Supreme Court (R Chitalekha vs State of Mysore,AIR 1964, SC 1823. Both the Courts upheld the GO.

The Havanur Commission (The First Backward Classes Commission)

The First Backward Class Commission was appointed in August 1972, under the Chairmanship of L G Havanur. The Commission submitted its report in 1975.

The Commission enunciated a numbers of tests for determining backwardness, economic, residential, and occupational, but it appeared from the report of the Commission that in the final analysis the assessment was made on the basis of the performance in the SSLC examination. Backward Classes (Excluding SC/ST) were grouped into three categories:

i. Backward Communites, whose student average per thousand of population is below State average, but above 50 per cent of the State average.

ii. Backward Castes whose student average per thousand of population is below 50 pr cent of the State average.

iii. Backward Tribes whose student avegage is bolow 50 pr cent of State average, except Dombars and Voddars, and whose are Nomadic and Denotified Tribes


Important findings

Educational Status of Some important caste groups

Percentage of Candidates passing SSLC examination held in 1972 ( Average pass per thousand of State population: 1.69)

Caste/ Community

Average passes per thousand population of the caste

Balija 4.53Bhunt 4.88Gatti 3.08Gudigar 2.53Kodaga 4.00Kshatriya 7.54Lingayat 2.33Maratha 2.17Mudali 2.76Nayar 4.18Christians 4.18Jains 4.71

(Extracted from Havanur Commission, Volume II, Statement 6, pp 216-8.)

Educational forwardness of some important backward castes

Literacy rate (percentage) by caste in 1951 ( State average 20.6%)

Caste/ community

Percentage of literacy

Christian 65.9Mudali 58.8Nagartha 58.0Jains 47.9Rajput 47.9Darzi 47.2Kshatriya 42.0Satani 39.3Muslim 37.2Devanga 31.9Viswakarma 30.6Neygi 30.4Lingayat 29.8Banajiga 29.6Mahratta 29.3

( Source : Mysore Backward Classes Committee, Interim Report, 1960, as quoted in Havanur Commission, Volume II, Statement 27, page 272.)

Adequate/ Inadequate representation of some important backward castes in State service as on 31st Mach 1972

Caste/Community

Population of caste as % of State population

% of employees excluding Class IV

Arasu 0.07 0.12Balija 1.57 1.93www.youthforequality.com 4

Bhunt 0.68 1.23Ganiga 0.52 0.55Gudigar 0.00 0.01Kodaga 0.29 1.24Kshatriya 0.25 0.93Kumarpanth 0.06 0.26Lingayat 14.64 19.90Malayali 0.01 0.03Mudaliyar 0.35 0.46Nayar 0.12 0.25Rajput 0.27 0.40Satani 0.18 0.31Vokkaliga 11.82 9.69Christian 2.09 4.04Jain 0.75 0.78

(Havanur Commission, Volume III, Statement IV, Page 265-7)

Commission’s observations and recommendations:

1. Following castes/communities were considered advanced for the purpose of Both Article 15(4) and Article 16(4):

a. Bunt

b. Gatti

c. Gudigara

d. Jetti

e. Kodagaru

f. Kshatriya

g. Lingayats (except artisan groups)

h. Maratha

i. Christian

j. Jain

2. Besides the above mentioned castes/communities, following Caste/communities were considered Advanced for the purpose of Article16(4):

a. Backward Communities: Arasu, Balija, Devadiga, Ganiga, Rajput, and Satani.

b. Backward Castes: – Banna, Gurka, Jat, Konga, Katari, Koyave, Malayali, Maniyali, Padarthi, Padiyar, Pandavakulam, Raval and Rawat

3. The Commission was of the view that caste-related backwardness was peculiar only to Hindus and, therefore, Muslims and Christians were not to be considered backward classes for the purpose of reservation under Articles 15(4) and 16(4). (Volume I, Pages 185, 321-322).


4. The Commission recommended a review after 10 years (Volme I, page318)

5. The Commission recommended following magnitude of reservations:

a. For Article 15(4)

Backward Group % of population

Reservation recommended

Backward tribes 8.00 6Backward Castes 14.49 10Backward Communities

22.03 16

Total forBackwards 44.52 32

b. For Article 16(4)

Backward Group

% of population

Reservation recommended

Backward tribes 8.00 6Backward Castes 14.47 10Backward Communities

19.2 16

Total forBackwards

41.674 32

The Government’s Response and subsequent developments:

Following Havanur Commission’s Report, the Government issued a GO on 22 February 1977 (Order No. SWL 12 TBS 77. Banglore, Dated 22nd February).

Important Recommendations:

1. Contrary to the recommendations of Havanur Commission, the State Government included all the Castes, mentioned above in 2a and 2b, for 16(4).

2. The Government also included Dalit Chritians in the list of Backwards.

3. Entire Muslim population was included in the list of backward communities.

4. In the cades of Backward Communities and Backward Castes, a ceiling of family income of Rs 8000/ was imposed to make them eligible for the benefits of reservation under article 15(4) and 16(4). (Later this limit was raised to Rs 10,000/-per annum by Order No. SWL 236 TBS 77, Banglore, Dated 15th November 1977).

5. In addition a Special Category called Backward Special Group was created for categories of citizens if the family income does not exceed Rs 48oo/ and parent/guardian is:

a. an actual cultivator,

b. artisan

c. a petty businessman.


d. holding an appointment in inferior services(i.e. Class –IV in Government service or corresponding services under private employment, including casual lab our) or

e. engaged in any occupation involving manual labour”

6. Following percentage of reservation was fixed:

a. Backward Communities - 20%

b. Backward Castes - 10%

c. Backward Tribes - 5%

d. Backward Special Group - 5%

The above mentioned GO was challenged in the High Court ( WP No. 4371/77, Somashekarappa & others Vs. State of Karnataka, dated 9th April 1979)

Important features of Judgement:

1. The Arasu (Urs) community was deleted from the list of backward classes, both for 15(4) and 16(4).

2. Deleted six communities (Balija, Devadiga, Ganiga, Nayinda, Rajput and Stani ) from the list of Backward communities for the purpose of Article 16(4) .

3. Thirteen Castes – Banna, Gurka, Jat, Konga, Katari, Koyave, Malayali, Maniyali, Padarthi, Padiyar, Pandavakulam, Raval and Rawat were also directed to be deleted from the list of backward Castes for the purpose of Article 16(4).

4. Directed the State to reduce the percentage of reservation for backward communities

In compliance to the above judgment, the list of backward classes was accordingly modified , also, reservation for backward communities was reduced from 20% to 18% ( Order No. SWL 123 BCA 79, Banglore, Dated 1st May 1979).

Later by Order No SWL 131 BCA 79, Banglore , Dated 27th June, the reservation for Special Backward Group was raised from 5% to 15%. The final reservation was as follows:

Social group Reservation under article 15(4)

Reservation under article 164)

Backward Communities

20 18

Backward Castes 10 10Backward Tribes 5 5Special Backward Group

15 15

Scheduled Castes 15 15Scheduled Tribes 3 3Total 68% 66%


The matter was then taken to the Supreme Court in Vasant Kumar’s case. Vasant Kumar’s case was heard by a Constitution Bench of five Judges. In the course of the hearing (on 23-11-1982) suggestion was made and it was readily accepted by Government of Karnataka that another Commission should be appointed to go into the entire question fresh.

VENKATASWAMY COMMISSION (SECOND BACKWARD CLASS COMMISSION OF KARNATAKA).

In the meanwhile, pursuant to the undertaking given by them, the Government of Karnataka appointed the Karnataka Second Backward Classes Commission presided over by Shri Venkatswamy in 1983. The Commission submitted its report in 1986.

Altogether 17 indicators were formulated to determine social backwardness. Some of the indicators were economic such as ownership of land, ownership of house, income etc. some of the indicators related to habitation (environment and residence), such as whether they lived in rural or urban areas, in pukka or katcha houses. Some indicators referred to the level of education that is, illiterate, studied upto SSLC etc., Other indicators referred to employment, in the various classes of service under the Government. All communities who scored nine or more backward indicators were considered to be socially backward. For Educational Backwardness,the performance in the SSLC examination was next taken into consideration and those communities whose percentage of passes was less than the State average ( 3.34 per thousand population) were considered educationally backward.


Important findings

Educational status of some of important castes/ communities (State Average of SSLC pass-out: 3.34 per thousand)

Caste/ Community Number of students passing out SSLC ( per thousand population of the caste)

Deshabandari 11.6Brahmin 10.6CNK 9.8Vaisya 8.7Sadaru 8.1Jain 7.8Gurka 7.4Jetty 7.3Christian 7.1Kshatriya 7.1Kodagaru 6.6Rajput 6.4Nayar 6.4Ambalavasi 5.5Darji 5.3Gatti 5.1Kanjirbat 5.0Ravula 4.6Devanga 4.5Mudaliyar 4.3Nagartharu 4.3Lingayata 4.3Kottari 4.1Bunt 4.0Balija 3.9Ganiga 3.8Neygi 3.8Somavamsha Kshatriya

3.5

Sikhs 3.4Urs 3.39Raju Kshatriya 3.39Viswakarma 3.37Devadiga 3.36Vokkaliga 3.34

(Venkataswamy Commission, Volume III, Annexure 9.5. Page 177)

Caste/Communities and their adequacy in State services Karnataka

Caste/ Community Percentage of population as per survey 1984

Percentage of representation in Govt services ( Class I, II, III)

Bandhi 0.02 0.03Balija 1.33 1.50Bhunt 0.83 0.84Darji 0.33 0.37Devadiga 0.29 0.29


Devanga 0.74 0.76Ganiga 0.45 0.55Gatti 0.01 0.02Goniga 0.03 0.03Gudigara 0.01 0.01Hindu Hugar 0.03 0.03Jetti 0.01 0.03Kamma 0.25 0.28Kodagaru 0.23 1.56Kote Kshatriya 0.08 0.10Kottari 0.02 0.02Kshatriya 0.44 0.62Raju Kshatriya 0.01 0.07Lingayatha/Veerashaiva

16.92 19.68

Maratha 3.20 3.26Mudaliar 0.48 0.49Nagartharu 0.03 0.03Neygi 0.65 0.84Rajput 0.15 0.57Satani 0.06 0.17Somavamsha Kshatriya

0.07 0.07

Urs 0.08 0.17Viswakarma/ panchala

1.96 2.24

Vokkaligha 11.68 11.74Christian 1.89 3.98

Important Recommendations/Observations of Venkataswamy Commission

1. Apart from Brahmins and Vaishyas, other populous and fairly populous communities such as Lingayat, Vokkaligas, Balija, Devanga, Neigi, Ganiga, Maratha, Vishvakarma etc, were not included among the backward classes either for the purpose of Article 15(4) or for the purpose of Article 16(4). The report immediately provoked criticism and agitation from affected castes.

2. Reservation under 15(4)

The Commission identified 35 castes/communities as socially and educationally backward classes for the purposes of benefits under Article 15(4) of the Constitution.

GROUPING OF BACKWARD CLASSES:

We have grouped the castes/communities which are below the state average in SSLC pass test viz. 3.34 per thousand but above 50% of the state average viz., 1.67 per thousand under Group ‘A’. The following communities along with their synonyms, sub-castes and related occupational groups are kept under this category of Group ‘A’: -

1. Deshbandhari

2. Kanjir Bhat

3. Kottari

4. Devadiga

5. Sikkiligara – Hindu

6. Nayinda

7. Jogi

8. Gondhali

9. Idiga


10. Muslim

11. Hugar

12. Kumbara

13. Agasa

14. Bavaji

15. Golla

Group – ‘B’: All the other castes/communities along with their synonyms, sub-castes and related occupational groups, which have secured below 50% of the state average in the SSLC pass test, have been grouped under category ‘B’,. The main caste names are

1. Medar

2. Katik

3. Kuruba

4. Bestha

5. Halawakkiwakkal

6. Uppara

7. Beda

8. Thigala

9. Helava

10. Rayarawat

11. Kudubi

12. Dasaru

13. Ladar

14. Budubuki

15. Tewar

16. Goniga

17. Siddi

18. Ambelkaran

19. Baanani

QUANTUM OF RESERVATION:

Group

Number of castes

Estimated population (%)

Recommended reservation

A 15 17.77 14%B 20 15.21 13%Total 35 32.98 27%

List of Castes/Communities for the purposes of article 16 (4)

Group – A

1. Agasa

2. Bavaji

3. Deshabandari

4. Golla

5. Gondhali

6. Hindu Sikkaligara

7. Hindu Hugar

8. Idiga

9. Jogi

10. Kambara

11. Nayinda

12. Muslim

Group-B

1. Ambalakaran,

2. Beda,

3. Bestha

4. Budubu Fiki

5. Dasaru

6. Goniga

7. Halwakki wakkal

8. Helava,

9. Khatik

10. Kudubi

11. Kuruba

12. Ladara

13. Medarwww.youthforequality.com 11

14. Rayaravut

15. Siddi

16. Tewar

17. Tigila

18. Uppara

19. SC converts to Christianity

14% reservation for Group A and 13 reservations for group B was prescribed.

3. Income Ceiling: To ensure that the economically affluent sections of these

castes/communities do not walk away with most of the reserved seats and posts, the Commission recommended the fixing up of an income ceiling of Rs. 15,000/ per annum. The members of the castes/communities identified as Backward classes, whose annual income from all sources is below Rs. 15,000/ only will be eligible for the facilities available under Article 15(4) and 16(4) of the constitution

4. Other restrictions: In order to eliminate the affluent among the backward classes from cornering the benefits under reservation, both under Articles 15(4) and 16(4), the Commission, after much deliberation, decided to insist on certain other information with regard to family income in the income certificate, in the form of a declaration. The income certificate should include a declaration consisting of the following:

Profession/occupation of the parents/guardian/family

Annual income of parents/guardian/family from all sources;

Extent of Agricultural land owned by parents/guardian/family;

Extent of urban property owned by parents/guardian/family;

Number of transport buses/lorries or tourist taxies owned by parents/guardian/family;

Extent of turn-over per month, in case the parents/guardian/family, owns an industry or engaged in business, trade and commerce.

Income certificate so issued to be notified in the concerned issuing offices or panchayats so that aggrieved persons can challenge the bonafides of the certificate issued.

5. In addition to the income ceiling and other restrictions on income, the commission decided that a generation limit should be applied. Hence it was decided that if the parents and grand-parent of the candidate had enjoyed the benefits of reservation in education or employment, such candidate will not be eligible for the benefits of reservation under Article 15(4) or under Article 16(4), as the case may be.

6. No caste /community be allowed to take double benefits, either under reservation provisions or for economic benefits under more than one classification or categories.

7. The Backward Special Group should be abolished.

8. The problem of the backward classes be reviewed once in every ten years.


Comments:

Contrary to the recommendations of the Commission, the Government included a number of Castes in the list of Backward Classes for the purpose of Article 16(4). Even the High Court disagreed with inclusion of those castes. Validity of this list was never discussed in the Supreme Court. Hence to proclaim that inclusion of these castes was done after proper investigation and that the list has withstood judicial scrutiny is not correct.

Government rejects Venkataswamy Report

The Government appeared to bow down to the criticism and the agitation. They rejected the report of the Venkataswamy Commission on various grounds. It was said that the Venkatswamy Commission did not have the benefit of the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court at the time formulating the indicators for determining backwardness , and when it embarked upon the task of obtain data, the fact was that though the commission commence its task of gathering the data even before the Supreme Court laid down the guidelines, they did, at the time of making their recommendations, take full notice of the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court and elaborately discussed in their report, everyone of the guidelines with reference to the data obtained by them. Nor did the Government say that all or any of the indicators formulated by the Commission were irrelevant in the light of the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court. Another reason given by the Government was that the data collected in the course of the socio-economic survey was not cross-checked for accuracy. They said that there was a great difference between the figures collected by the Commission in the course of the socio-economic survey and the figures obtained from the Bureau of Economics and Statistics in regard to employment under the Government. This may be so but the reason is obvious. The information obtained in the course of the socio-economic survey regarding employment was from ignorant people living in the rural area such like who could not be expected to be knowledgeable about the nice difference between Class-I and Class-II officers. Again, the figures obtained in the Socio-Economic survey covered employment under the State Government and their undertakings. Some other reasons were also given by the Government in the comprehensive statement submitted by them before me. It is not my purpose to criticize or launch into an elaborate discussion of the reasons given by the Government. But it appeared to me, prima facie, that justice was not done to the report of the Venkataswamy Commission and the report did not get the deal that it deserved. I am however happy to be able to say that barring few exceptions most of the witnesses that appeared before me were highly appreciative of the work done by the Venkataswamy Commission.

Government Makes ‘Interim Arrangement’

The Government rejected the report of the Venkataswamy Commission. They decided to appoint a new Commission but pending the report of the Commission to be appointed they issued Government Order NO. SWL 66 BCA 86 dated 13.10. 1986 specifying the backward classes for the purpose of Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution. The backward classes were divided into five groups – A, B, C, D and E. Group – A was described as ‘Backward Tribes’ and contained names of 61 castes/tribes with their synonyms. Group – B consisted of 138 castes for the purpose of Article 15 (4) and 119 castes for the purpose of Article 16(4). Group C consisted of 7 castes both for the purpose of Article 15(4) and Article 16(4). Group – D consisted of 7 castes or communities for the purpose of Article (15)4 and 16 communities for the purposes of Article 16(4). Group – E was styled as Backward Special Group and was to consist of:

1. an actual cultivator


2. an artisan

3. a petty businessman

4. one holding an appointment either in Govt. service or corresponding service under private employment including casual labour

5. any person self-employed or engaged in any occupation involving manual labour.

The family income ceiling for Group B, C and D was Rs. 10,000/ and for Group – Rs. 8,00/. There was no limit for Group – A. the percentage of reservation for Group A, B, C, D and E for Article 15(4) and Article 16(4) was 5%, 15%, 16%, 9%, 5% and 5%, 13%, 16% 11%, 5%, respectively. Practically all Hindu castes except Brahmins other than Padartis and Staniks and Vaishyas were included in one or the other Groups – A, B, C, D. Muslims were included in Group – C. Scheduled Caste converts to Christianity were included in Group – B. Further Christians were treated as backward for Article 16(4) and were included in Group D. I tried in vain to get an adequate explanation for the grouping Vokkaligas together with Darzis. Does it mean that I the opinion of the Government, the degree of Backwardness of Vokkaligas and Darzis is roughly the same? Similarly Lingayats are clubbed with Somavamsha Kshatriyas in Group – D and Balijas are clubbed together with Agasas and Bestas in Group – B as if their respective degrees of backwardness were the same.

Subsequently, the Government appointed The Third Backward Class Commission headed by Justice Chinnappa Reddy. The Commission submitted its report in the year 1990.

EXCERPTS FROM THE THIRD KARNATAKA BACKWARD CLASS COMMISSION (CHINNAPPA REDDY COMMISSION)

Pg.34, the Report of the Third Karnataka Backward Classes’ Commission

Caste: a Reality

On the other hand, it is said with equal force that it is a matter for shame and regret that despite the passing of decades after the expression of high flown sentiments in the constitution, the situation of the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and other Socially and Educationally Backward Classes has remained static and not shown any marked improvement. And, we have political parties and politician who, if anything, are realists, fully aware of the deep roots of caste in Indian society and who, far from ignoring it, feed the fire as it were and give caste great importance in the choice of their candidates for election and flaunt the caste of the candidates before the electorate. They preach against caste in public and thrive on it in private. Infact, the caste of the candidates seeking election to Parliament and the Legislative Assembly of Karnataka recently was announced by all parties with neither blush or regret. The President of the Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee is reported to have said that his party’s list contained “59 Backward Class persons, 51 Lingayats, 49 Vokkaligas (including bunts and Reddis) 34 Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe persons, 23 from the Minorities and 8 Brahmins”.

The chairman of the State Janata Dal Parliamentary Board is reported to have said that the castewise breakup of candidates of his party was: “65 Lingayats, 37 Vokkaligas (including Bhunts) 47 backward classes, 33 Scheduled Castes/Scheduled


Tribes, 11 Minorities and 13 Brahmins”. In regard to Lok- Sabha the break up was “8 Lingayats, 4 Vokkaligas, 6 Backward Classes, 5 Minorities, 1 Brahmin and 4 Scheduled castes”. The leader of the State Janata Party is reported to have said that the caste-wise break up of his party’s candidate was “55 Lingayats, 48 Vokkaligas, 48 Backward Classes, 21 Monorities, 12 Muslims, 4 Christians, 1 Jain, 1 Kodava, 2 Marathas, 7 Brahmins, 4 Scheduled Castes, 4 Backward Classes 2 Muslims and 1 Kodava. Need I say more about the role of the dominance of caste in the politics of the State of Karnataka”.

Pg.40, The Report of the Third Karnataka Backward Classes’ Commission

We may begin the discussion relating to the various caste/community groups with a reference to the distribution of political power among the various castes/communities in the State of Karnataka. In the Karnataka Legislative assembly, as constituted at present, there are 57 Lingayats, 43 Vokkaligas, 33 Members of the Scheduled Caste, 12 Muslims, 12 Idigas, 9 Brahmins, 8 Marathas, 10 Kurubas, 7 Bedas, 3 Bunts, 6 Balijas, 2 Besthas, 4 Jains, 2 Christian, 2 members of the Scheduled Tribes and 2 Gollas, one Vyasya, one Urs. One Kodava, one Devadiga, one Halwakki Vakkal, one Rajput and one Kshatriya. The members of the Lok Sabha from the Karnataka constituencies consist of 8 Lingayats, 5 Vokkaligas, 4 members of Scheduled Castes, 2 Brahmins, 2 Mislims, 2 Kurubas, one Urs, two Billava, one Beda, and one Christian. The distribution of members of the Karnataka Legislative Council is, 24 Lingayats, 13 Vokkaliga, 9 members of the Scheduled Castes, 7 Brahmins, 4 Muslims, 2 Bunts, 2 Kodavarus, 2 Balajigas, 2 Kurubas, one Ganiga, one Jain and one Vysys.

The Presidentship of the Zila Parishads in the State distributed in the following manner: Six Lingayats, Six Vokkaligas, Two Bunts, One Kodavaru, One Kuruva, one Bestha, One Maratha and One Jain out of a total nineteen.

The membership of the Zilla Parishads is distributed in the backward following manner: our of 863, there are Lingayats 254, Vokkaligas 187, S.C.’s 158, S.T.’s 46, Brahmins 27, Kurubas 26, Muslims 23, Bedas 21, Marachas 20, Idigas 15, Kumbaras 10, Bunts 10, Kodagaru 9, Christian 9, BEsthas 8, Vaishyas 6, Gollas 5, Jains 4, Kshatriyas 3, Upparas 3, Balijas 2, Darjis 2, Devanga 2, TIgala 2, Ganiga 1, Halwakki Vakkaliga 1, Mudiliar 1, Nayinda 1 and Urs 1.

From these figures, it is easily seen that the Lingayat and the Vokkaliga communities dominate the political scene. The number of members from each of the two communities whether in the Karnataka Legislative Assembly, the Karnataka Legislative Council or the Parliament far exceeds the number to which the community would be entitled strictly on the basis of its population. 28.58% members of the Lok Sabha, 27.93% members of the Legislative Assembly and 32.88% members of the Legislative Council belong to the Lingayat community whereas their estimated population is 15.3389% of the total estimated population of the state.

17.86% of the members of the Lok Sabha, 18.02% members of the Legislative Assembly, 17.80% members of the Legislative Council belong to Vokkaliga community whereas their estimated population is 10.8086% of the total population of the State. Socially and educationally backward or not, the Lingayat and the Vokkaliga Communities appear to be the true wielders of the political power in the State of Karnataka and that certainly has a bearing on the question whether each of these communities, as such that is, co nomine, may be identified as socially backward. It may also be interesting to not here that if comparison with the percentage of population is a test, the Brahmin community also wields more political power than its due share. The percentage of members of the Brahmin community in the Lok Sabha is 7.14, in the Legislative Assembly 4.05 and in the Legislative Council 19.59, whereas the estimated Brahmin population is 3.4558% of the total estimated www.youthforequality.com 15

population of the State. Perhaps, I should mention here that since 1950 that is since India become a Republic, there have been eleven Chief Ministers of the State, Five of them were Lingayats- Sarvshri Nijalingappa, B.D. Jatti, Nijalingappa, S.R. Kanthi, Nijalingappa, Virendra Paul, S.R. Bommai, Virendra Patil. Three were Vokkaligas – Sarvashri K.C. Reddy, K. Hanumanthaiah, Kadidal Manjapa and two were Brahmins – Shri Gundu Rao, Shri R.K. Hedge. The only other Chief Minister Shri Devraj Urs as from the Urs community, the community of the erstwhile Maharaja of Mysore. So far as the Brahmin community is concerned, there can be no questin that they are socially and educationally the most advanced community in the State of Karnataka even if some of them are poor. In fact, from the beginning the demand for special provision for other communities on the ground of backwardness stemmed from a comparison with the achievements of the Brahmin community. The Non-Brahmin movement which preceded the Backward Classes movement was the result of a consciousness among all the Non-Brahmin communities that it was the Brahmin community that was enjoying all the educational and employment opportunities till then available, denying to all other communities even the merest modicum of those opportunities. The backward class movement of the present day similarly stems from a consciousness that the educational and employment opportunities provided by reservation etc. consequent upon the Non-Brahmin movement had been more or less monopolized by a few communities who had the necessary social background and financial anchorage to take advantage of such opportunities.

In so far as the Brahmin community is concerned, apart from the fact they are traditionally the leaders of Indian Society and reputedly the most advanced, it will also be easy to demonstrate from the statistics relating to employment and education (particularly admissions to professional and higher educational institutions and appointments to services under the State), that they are indeed far ahead of all other communities, socially and educationally. The facts will become patent when I refer to the service statistics. I may mention that as on 1-2-1990, out of 19 judges of the High Court of Karnataka, 5 areVokkaligas, 4 are Lingayats, 3 are Brahmins, 2 Muslims, 1 Balija, 1 Kuruvina Shetty, 1 Urs, 1 S.C. and 1 Pillai. Out of 29 Secretaries to the Government, there are 12 Brahmins, 3 Lingayats, 4 Christians, 2 S.C.’s, 1 Muslim, 1 Bunt, 1 Kshatriya, 1 Vaishya, 1 Mudaliar and 1 Kayasth. So, it appears that between them, the Brahmin, the Lingayat and the Vokkaliga communities rule the roost in the State of the Karnataka, one way or the other. If Lingayats and Vokkaligas are the political masters, the Brahmins are the social, educational and establishment leaders.

The political dominance of the three communities, Lingayats, Vokkaligas and Brahmins appears almost to be a reflection of the ownership of land in the State of Karnataka though it may not be in the same proportion. Out of the 13,058 persons who made declarations of surplus land holdings under the Land Reforms Act, 6,044 (46.30%) were Lingayats, 1820 (13.90%) were Vokkaligas and 1,795 (13.80) were Brahmins between them the three communities accounted for 74.00% of those that filed declarations of surplus land holdings.

Pg.49, 50, 51, the Report of the Third Karnataka Backward Classes’ Commission

Name of the other castes/communities owned more than 200 acres. It will be noticed that in the case of the following communities, the percentage of land held by the community was higher than the percentage of its population:

Vakkaliga, Lingayat, Kuruba, Brahmin, Kodagaru, Ganiga, Kshtriaya, Hugar, Jain and S.T.

In the case of the following communities the percentage of population was higher than the percentage of land held;


Beda, Bestha, Golla, Idiga, Uppara, Bunt, Agasa, Kumbara, Balija Vysya, Devanga, Nayinda, Muslim, Christian, S.C. and Devadiga.

As already mentioned the total extent of land in the 523 villages is 5,12,900 acres. The population is 5,56,602. The average extent of land per 100 persons is 92.148. in the case of the following communities, the land held per 100 persons of the community is in excess of the average per 100 persons of all the villages, in descending order:

Kadagaru (325.445), Vokkaliga (2.265), S.T. (153.25), Brahmin 150.8176, Jain (144.965), Lingayat (132.2467), Ganiga (121.606), Kshatriya (17.575), Hugar (104.037), Kuruba (99.8056). The community next below the general average of 92.148 is the Maratha community with 86.11.

From whatever angle viewed, whether from the view-point of the number of surplus Landholders or the or the extend of land as revealed by the test-survey, the Vokkaliga and the LIngayat communities emerge as the leading landowners of Karnataka. They are not only the political masters but also the economic masters of rural Karnataka. However, it must also be remembered that some of the communities who appear to own les than per 100 persons than the general average are trading castes like Vaishya and Balijas or artisan castes like Devanga. Some are urban oriented like the Mudaliar community. In their case not owning greater extent of land does not indicate any inferior economic position.

Pg. 53, Third Backward Classes Commission Report of Karnataka, 1990

The test Socio-Economic and Educational Survey shows that the Kodagaru leads not only in the extent of land held by 100 persons of each community, they are also the most literate of all communities. While they possess 325.445 acres of land per 100 persons of the community and the rate of illiteracy is as low as 8.0735%, the average extent of land per 100 persons in the 523 villages is 92.148 acres and the average rate of illiteracy is 57.98%. It may be mentioned here that at the last i.e. 1981 Census, the State average of illiteracy was 69.00%. The other communities whose average literacy rate is higher than the averae of the 523 villages are Brahmin, Vysya, Devadiga, Bunt, Idiga, Christian, Maratha, Hoogar, Neygi, Tigala, Lingayat, Vokkaliga, Balija, Nayinda and Kumbara.

The Total Number of candidates who appeared at the 1988 March SSLC examination was 3,37,801. Out of whom 1,70,547 (50.49%) passed the examination.

The castewise distribution of candidates that appeared at the SSLC examination in March 1988 and of those that passed was shown in the (next page) statement.

Pg.56, The Report of the Third Karnataka Backward Classes’ Commission

We see that the percentage of the total number of candidates of all communities that appeared at the SSLC examination in March 1988 to the total population of the State is 0.77 while the percentage of total number of candidates of all communities tat passed the SSLC examination to the total population of the state is 0.39.

If only 0.75% is adopted as a cut-off point for appearance at the SSLC examination it will be found that in the case of the following communities the percentage of candidates that appeared at the SSLC examination to the total population of the caste/community was less than 0.75%:- Devadiga, Tigalal, Budubuduki, Nahyinda, Gondhali, Jogi, Idiga, Mudiliyar, Bavaji, Agasa, Maratha, Ladara, S.C., Raju-Kshatriya, Kumbara, Sikkaligara, Kotar, Golla, Goniga, Medar, Muslim Pategar, Bestha, Kuruba, Uppara, Halwakki-wakkal, Beda, Medar, Dasari, Tewar, Agamudi, Satani, S.T., Kudibi Baandhi, Siddi.


The report of the Third Karnataka Backward Classes Commission

Caste Population of community in 523 villages

% of population of community to total Population of 523 villages

Extent land of held in acres

% of Land held by community to total land

Land held in acres per 100 persons of the community

1 2 3 4 5 6Vokkaliga 72,130 12.9590 145,173 28.3403 201.265Lingayat 104,544 18.4232 138,256 26.9616 132.2467kuruba 46,290 8.3165 46,200 9.0076 99.8056Beda 40,554 7.2889 23,503 4.5824 57.954Maratha 19,733 3.5524 16,992 3.3129 86.1096Brahmin 10,213 1.8349 15,403 3.0031 150.8176Bestha 18,316 3.2906 10,844 2.1143 59205Golla 10,992 1.9748 7,397 1.4422 67.2944Idiga 16,754 3.0100 6,368 1.2416 38.009Kodagaru 1,796 0.3227 5,854 1.1396 325.445Uppara 10,218 1.8358 5,201 1.0140 50.9Bunt 5,864 1.0535 3,845 0.7497 65.57Agasa 6,244 1.1218 3,745 0.7302 59.978Ganiga 2,416 0.4340 2,938 0.5728 121.606Kumbara 4,174 0.7499 2,211 0.4311 52.971Balija 3,407 0.6121 2,073 0.4042 60.845Vysya 1,874 0.3367 1,420 0.2768 75.774Kshatriya 1,505 0.2704 1,619 0.3156 107.575Devanga 2,464 0.4428 1,180 0.2301 47.9Nayinda 4,086 0.7341 744 0.1451 18.21Devagida 1,988 0.3571 433 0.0844 21.781Hoogar 322 0.0580 335 0.0653 104.037Muslim 35,932 6.4556 15,420 3.0064 42.9144Christian 5,677 1.0199 4,090 0.7974 72.0451Jain 2,840 0.5102 4,117 0.8027 144.965S.C. 103,216 18.5439 36,045 7.0277 34.922S.T. 2,077 0.3732 3,183 0.6205 153.25

P.No.-52, The report of the Third Karnataka Backward Classes Commission

Caste Population of community

% of population of community to total Population of 523 villages

No. of illiterates

% of illiterates to Caste Population

1 2 3 4 5Beda 40,554 7.2889 30,096 74.21Kuruba 46,290 8.3165 32,783 70.82Bestha 18,316 3.2906 12,829 70.04Devanga 2,464 0.4428 1,715 69.57Agasa 6,244 1.1218 4,195 67.18Uppara 10,218 1.8358 6,666 65.24


Viswakarma 10,757 1.9326 6,555 60.94Golla 10,992 1.9748 6,658 60.57Ganiga 2,416 0.4340 1,452 60.10Kshatriya 1,505 0.2704 902 59.93Kumbara 4,174 0.7499 2,328 55.77Nayinda 4,086 0.7341 2,240 54.82Balija 3,407 0.6121 1,819 53.39Vokkaliga 72,130 12.9590 37,968 52.64Lingayat 104,544 18.4232 52,354 51.06Tigala 1,126 0.2023 570 50.62Neygi 1,519 0.2729 754 49.64Hoogar 322 0.0580 158 49.07Maratha 19,733 3.5524 9,219 46.99Idiga 16,754 3.0100 6,001 35.82Bunt 5,864 1.0535 1,849 31.53Devagida 1,988 0.3571 571 28.72Vysya 1,874 0.3367 456 24.33Brahmin 10,213 1.8349 1,987 19.45Kodagaru 1,796 0.3227 145 8.07Muslim 35,932 6.4556 20,532 57.14Christian 5,677 1.0199 2,263 39.86Jain 2,840 0.5102 1,093 38.48

P.No.55, The report of the Third Karnataka Backward Classes Commission

Caste wise distribution of candidate that appeared at the SSLC examination in 1988 and caste-wise distribution of those that passed.

1. Percentage of the total no of the student that appeared to total population of the state: 0.77

2. Percentage of the total no of the student that passed to total population of the state: 0.39

Sl.No. % of candidates of the caste to the Population of the caste (Appeared Candidates)

Name of the caste % of the candidate of caste to the population of the caste (Passed Candidates)

1 11.64 Ambalavesi 6.352 7.40 Kaniyan 2.333 2.73 Sadaru 1.114 2.65 Kote Kshtria 1.495 2.32 Ambalakaran 1.396 1.95 Katik 0.797 1.93 Kodagaru 0.868 1.85 Kanjirbhat 0.469 1.79 Gatti 1.1810 1.44 Vaisya 0.8711 1.42 Raya Rawath 0.6912 1.41 Brahmin 0.9813 1.12 Rajput 0.6114 1.12 Jatti 0.5115 1.10 Vokkaliga 0.44


16 1.10 Darzi 0.6917 1.05 Devanga 0.5418 0.99 Jain 0.74

19 0.99Somavamsha Kshatriya 0.62

20 0.99 Nayar 0.7121 0.98 Balija 0.4522 0.96 Kshatriya 0.5823 0.94 Lingayath 0.5424 0.94 Christain 0.5925 0.92 Gudighar 0.5926 0.92 Viswakarma 0.5427 0.89 Neygi 0.4928 0.88 Hugar 0.5029 0.88 Bunt 0.5430 0.85 Ganiga 0.4531 0.82 Urs 0.3432 0.76 Nagartha 0.3433 0.70 Devadiga 0.4034 0.69 Tigala 0.2135 0.68 Budududuki 0.2936 0.68 Nayianda 0.3437 0.66 Gondhali 0.5138 0.66 Jogi 0.3639 0.65 Idiga 0.3440 0.64 Mudaliyar 0.3241 0.64 Bavaji 0.3842 0.63 Agasa 0.2543 0.62 Maratha 0.4244 0.60 Ladara 0.2845 0.59 S.C. 0.2246 0.59 Raju Kshatriya 0.2247 0.59 Kumbara 0.3048 0.57 Sikkaligara 0.2749 0.56 Kotari 0.3650 0.55 Golla 0.2251 0.52 Goniga 0.3252 0.48 Muslim 0.2553 0.41 Pategar 0.3054 0.41 Bestha 0.1955 0.41 Kuruba 0.1856 0.41 Uppara 0.1857 0.40 Halwakkiwakkal 0.1658 0.40 Beda 0.2959 0.35 Medar 0.2060 0.31 Dasari 0.1661 0.30 Tewar 0.1962 0.28 Agamudi 0.1263 0.25 Satani 0.1364 0.20 S.T. 0.0765 0.18 Kudubi 0.1266 0.09 Baandhi 0.0867 0.07 Siddi 0.0568 - Banjari -


69 - Bhartaju -70 - Bhamta -71 - Bogad -72 - Chunchar -73 - Devadasi -74 - Ghisadi -75 - Gurav -76 - Hawadiga -77 - Kanate -78 - Kashikapadi -79 - Katabar -80 - Kolla -81 - Kolari -82 - Kurma -83 - Malava -84 - Madhar -85 - Otari -86 - Pamlor -87 - Pangual -88 - Panika -89 - Rainudas -90 - Sansia -91 - Satarkar -92 - Takankar -93 - Tilari -94 - Vaidu -95 - Vasudev -96 - Veer -97 - Yeralu -98 - Yerkala -99 - Buddhist -100 - Sikh -101 - Parsi -102 - Caste not known -

P.No.57-58-59, The report of the Third Karnataka Backward Classes Commission

SOCIAL HIERARCHY OF THE CASTES

The Lingayat or Veerashaiva Community

The Lingayat or Veerashaiva Community constitutes the single largest social group in the State of Karnataka. They are the followers of Sri Basaveswara, a Saint and a Social-religious reformer of the 12th century who founded a faith which is antiritual, anti-caste, anti-mystic and anti-priest-craft. There is a controversy whether Veerashaivism is a distinct religion or whether it is a Hindu religious sect. we are not concerned with this controversy. But it must be observed that faith in the teachings of Basaveswara has infused into the members of the community a certain spirit of militancy and a certain pride, dignity and assurance in themselves. The word ‘Veerashaiva’ itself means the brave devotee of Lord Shiva. They occupy a very high position in Karnataka Society and all available information points to their general economic prosperity. They are the leading land owners and traders of the State and Politically the most powerful. The statistical information pertaining to the educational


and employment fields also reveals their considerable advancement. If it is remembered that until 1986 they did not have the benefit of any reservation, it would be immediately realized that the Lingayat-Veerashaiva community cannot possibly be classified backward as a whole. The test Socio-Economic and Educational Survey of 523 villages leads to the same conclusion.

As mentioned earlier 28.58% members of the Lok Sabha elected from the State of Karnataka, 27.93% members of the Legislative Assembly and 32.88% of the members of the Legislative Council are Lingayats. 46.3% of the surplus land holders in the State belong to this community. 0.9480% of the population of the community appeared at the SSLC examination and 0.5394% passed the examination as against the State averages of 0.77% and 0.39%. 15.68% of the total number of seats in Professional Colleges and Post-graduate institutions were secured by the members of the community as against their population 15.3389%. In regard to entry into the services, they were able to secure 17.7093% of the posts in the recruitment immediately prior to 1986. They held 20.1055% of the group A posts under the Government and 18.5623% of the posts in Group A, B and C together. They also hold 16.5920% of the posts in Groups A and B in the public Sector undertakings. From these figures, only one conclusion is possible and that is that the Lingayat community cannot be classified as a Socially and Economically Backward Class though undoubtedly a large section of the community is poor like larger sections of all other communities.

Pg. 117-118, The report of the Third Karnataka Backward Classes Commission

VOKKALIGAS

Vokkaligas are the next dominant caste group in Karnataka in terms of population. There are several sub-sects among the Vokkaligas but there is no appreciable difference between the various sub-sects in their social status or economic position. Other communities such as Reddy, Kapu, Kamma and Velama have also been treated as Vokkaligas because of the similarity of their customs, occupations and social status. There appear to be inter-marriages also among these communities. The Vokaliga community along with Lingayat community is one of the two principal agricultural communities of the State. They occupy a high position in the social hierarchy of Karnataka. Along with the Lingayats they are the principal landowners. Along with the Lingayats they share most of the political power. The statistics pertaining to appearance at the passing the S.S.L.C examinations, admission to professional and post graduate colleges, show that as Caste-groups they are well advanced, that is, much more advanced than the vast majority of the Hindu castes. They cannot therefore by classified as Socially and Educationally Backward Caste-Groups.

It has already been mentioned that 17.86% of the members of the Lok Sabha, 18.02% of the members of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly and 17.80% of the members of the Karnataka Legislative Council are Vokkaligas. It has also been noticed that 13.9% of the surplus land holders are from this community. The SSLC-appeared and SSLC-passed statistics show that 1.1086% of the population of the community appeared at and passed the SSLC examination as against the State average of 0.77% and 0.39%. In the matter of admission to Professional Colleges and Post-graduate institutions, they were able to secure 11.63% of the seats while in the matter of recruitment to Services, they were able to secure 11.9918% of the posts before 1986 and 12.9217% of the posts after 1986. Their performance all round has been more than satisfactory. The land and literacy percentages as revealed by the Test Survey of 523 villages showed that Vokkaligas cannot be classified as backward. While classifying the Vokkaliga community as an advanced community the circumstance that a lager section of the community is poor has also been taken into considerations. I may mention here that 51.59% of the students of the community www.youthforequality.com 22

who appeared at the SSLC examination belong to the income group of Rs.1-2500. In the Services under the Government they hold 12.6853% of the Group A posts and they also hold 14.7761% of the posts in Groups A and B in Public Sector undertakings.


Maratha

The Maratha caste/community is the next most populous community (pop. 12,80,268=2.9039% fo the State population). Traditionally they are agriculturists and soldiers. They claim to be Kshatriyas and they follow Brahminical rites and usages and even wear the sacred thread. Now a days most of them are agriculturists and some have taken to trade and Government Service. There can be no question that their social status is atleast as high as the Vokkaligas. They were not included among backward classes either by the Havanur Commission or by the Venkata Swamy Commission. From the SSLC statistics it is seen that 0.6228% of the caste population appeared at the SSLC examination aas against the State average of 0.79% and 0.4240% of the caste population passed the SSLC examination as against the State average of 0.39%. In other words, the percentage of candidates that passed the SSLC examination was higher than the State average while the percentage of that appeared at the examination was lower than the State average. I find that the percentage of students of the community appeared at the SSLC examinations who belong to the income group of Rs.1-2500 was 32.49 a comparatively low figure. The test survey of 523 villages shows that while the extent of land held by the members of the community is slightly below the average of all communities, the rate of illiteracy is much lower than the average of all communities (which means the rate of literacy is higher). Either in the matter of admissions to professional colleges and post-graduate institutions or in the matter of recruitment to Services, their performance did not measure up to their population. Their representation in Group-A services under the Government is only 1.0366% and in Groups A and B in public sector undertakings it is 0.8458%. These percentages may appear to be low but that is easily explained by the circumstance that until 1986 they never had the benefit of reservation, having always been considered to be an advanced community. The point to be appreciated is that despite no reservation in their favour, they have been able to secure a fair number of seats and posts. There are not sufficient circumstances to justify their transfer to the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes at the present juncture, both the earlier Commissions having refused to include the community among Backward Classes. Having regard to their high social status, high literacy rate and good S.S.L.C passed percentage they cannot be classified as socially and educationally backward.

Pg. 122, The report of the Third Karnataka Backward Classes Commission

Balaji, Bunt, Vysya, Jain, and Nagartha

We may next consider the Balija, Bunt, Vysya, Jain Communities. The Bunt and the Vysya communities have the reputation of the being very prosperous communities. The Vysya, Jain, Balija and Nagartha communities are principally traders by tradition though quite a large number of Balijas are engaged in a agriculture also. Some Jains have also taken to agriculture. The Bunt community is engaged in both agriculture and trade. The Vysys, Jain and the Nagartha communities were never include damong backward classes. The Bunt community was not included among backward classes by the Havanur Commission or by the Venkata Swamy Commission but they were included in Group by the 1986 G.O. for the purpose of Article 16(4) only. The Havanur Commissoin did not treat Balija as a backward class for the purpose of 16(4) only but included them among backward communities for the purpose of 15(4) only. The Venkata Swamy Commission did not include them among backward classes for www.youthforequality.com 23

the purpose of 15(4) or for the purpose of 16(4). The percentage of persons appearing at the SSLC examination to the population of the caste and the percentage of persons passing the SSLC examination to the population of the caste is higher than the state average of 0.77% and 0.39% in the case of every one of the communities except the Nagartha in whose case it was the same approximately. The percentage of those that appeared in respect of each community was 0.9845, 0.8812, 1.4404, 0.9984 and 0.7684 respectively. I may add that the percentage of students from these communities from income group of Rs. 1-2500 was 45.02, 32.32, 3021 and 21.26% respectively. In regard to admissions to professional colleges and post-graduate institutions also the Vysya, the Balija, the Bunt, the Jain and the Nagartha communities were able to secure more percentage of seats than the percentage of their population. They secured more percentage of seats than the percentage of their population. They secured 1.51%, 0.90%, 1.34%, 0.64% and 0.02% of the seats as against their population of 1.2039, 0.7500, 0,6961, 0.7808% and 0.0267%. In the matter of entry to Government service, the Vysya, the Jain, the Balija and the Nagartha communities secured a higher percentage of posts than to which their population entitled them. In the case of Bunt community they were able to secure a lesser percentage or posts than the percentage of their population. Here it must also be remembered that the Vysya, the Jain and the Nagartha communities did not had the benefit o f reservation at any time for any purpose while the Bunts had the benefit of reservation for the purpose of Article 16(4) only after 1986 and the Balijas had the benefit of reservation throughout for Article 15(4) and after 1986 only for the purpose of Article 16(4). As on 2.11.88, the Balija, Bunt, Vysya, Jain and Nagartha communities held 1.6828%, 1.0185%, 1.5459%, 1.2003% and 0.063% of posts in Group A under the Government and 2.2139%, 0.5970%, 1.9652, 0.7463% and 0.0497% of posts in Groups A and B in Public Sector Undertakings. In the case of Balija, the Vysya and the Nagartha communities their representatioin is higher than the percentage of their population. The Bunt and the Jain communities hold more posts in Group A service under the Government than the percentage of their population but they appear to hold a slightly less percentage of posts in Groups A and B in Public Sector undertakings than the percengate of their population but that is not of any great significance having regard to their otherwise good performance. The social status of all five communities is high. Under the circumstance none of the five communities can be classified as a Socially and Educationally Backward Class for any purpose. The rate literacy as revealed by the Test Survey is very high in all the three communities.


Kodaguru (Coorgie)

The Kodaguru (Coorgie) community has a population of 93,607 (0.2123%). They are supposed to be a martial race with a high standing in society, two of the members of the community having risen to be rank Chief of Staff in the Indian army. Many of them are agriculturists and coffee planters. They were not included among backward classes at any time. The percentage of SSLC-appeared and SSLC-passed from the community were 1.9390 and 0.8610 respectively more than double the state average. They were also able to secure more than their share of seats in the professional colleges and post-graduate institutions. they were able to secure 0.3527% of posts prior to 1986 and 0.0636% of posts after 1986. the Test Survery showed that both in the matter of literacy and land their average was higher than that of any other Community. As on 2.11.88 the community held 0.78% of Group A posts under the Government and 0.6468% of posts in Groups A and B in the Public Sector undertakings, both very much higher than the percentage of their population. They are undoubtedly an advanced community.



Rajput

The Rajput community with an estimated population of 61,784 (o.1401%) is supposed to be a community of soldiers by tradition. But now, as represented by the Karnataka State Gazetteer, they are engaged in agriculture, sheep breeding, tailoring, petty business etc. The Havanur Commission included them in Backward communities for both purpose but their inclusion for the purpose 16(4) was struck down by the High Court. They were not included in any list of backward classes by the Vankata Swamy Commission. The 1986 G.O. included them in Group –B for 15(4) and Group – D for 16 (4). The SSLC – appeared and the SSLC – passed percentage of the community were 1.1281% and 0.6150% of the population of the community, both above the state average. In the matter of admissions to Professional Colleges and Post-graduate institutions, they were able to secure 0.20% and 0.6150% of the population of the community, both above the State average. In the matter of admissions to professional colleges and Post-graduate institutions, they were able to secure 0.20% of the posts as against the population of 0.1401%. In the matter of recruitment to Services also, both prior to and after 1986 their representation was much higher than the percentage of their population. (0.2784 and 0.2546 as against 0.1401). As on 2.11.88 the community held 0.2273% of posts in Group A under the Government and 0.1741% of posts in Groups A and B in the public sector undertakings, both higher than the percentage of their population. It is not possible to classify the community as Socially and Educationally Backward.


Sadaru

Sadaru is a small community with a population of 23,402 (0.0531%). Their principal occupation is agriculture. A few of them are also engaged in trade. To distinct themselves from those convered to Veerashaiva faith, they call themselves Hindu Sadaru. Their SSLC performance is very good. They were able to secure 4 admissions into professional and post-graduate institutions. they were able to secure 5 posts before 1986 and none after 1986 in the Government Service. They appear to be quite an advanced community and infact their representatives who appeared before me admitted that they stood roughly in the same position as the Vokkaligas. As on 2.11.88 the community held 0.136% of Group – A posts under the Government and 0.0995% of posts in Groups A and B in the Public Sector undertakings, both higher than the percentage of their population. I do not think they can be classified as Socially and Educationally Backward. Earlier they were not classified as backward by either the Havanur Commission or by the Venkata Swamy Commission.


I. Castes Which did not have benefits of reservation at any timeSl. No. Castes1 Agamudi2 Brahmin3 Buddhist4 Bunt5 Christian6 Jain7 Kodagaru8 Mudaliyar9 Nagartha10 Nayar11 Parsi


12 Sikh13 Vaishya

Reference:

Report of the Karnataka Third Backward Class Commission, Vol. I; O. Chinappa Reddy, 1990; Pg. No. 68.

II. Caste Which was treated as Backward in 1977 G. O. but was not in 1979 or 1986 G.O.14 Urs

Reference:


III. Castes which were not treated as backward in 1970 G.O. but were treated as backward in 1986 G.O.15 Baandhi16 Gatti17 Gudigara18 Jatti19 Kshatriya20 Lingayath21 Maratha22 Raju Kshatriya23 Sadaru24 Siddi25 Tewar

Reference:


IV. Castes which had the benefit of Reservation Under 1977, 1979, and 1986 G. O.s.26 Agasa27 Ambalakaran28 Ambalavasi29 Balija30 Banjari31 Beda32 Bestha33 Bavaji34 Bhatraju35 Bhamta36 Budubudiki37 Bogad38 Chunchar39 Dasari40 Darzi


41 Devadiga42 Devadasi43 Devanga44 Ganiga45 Golla46 Gondali47 Goniga48 Ghisadi49 Gurav50 Gurkha51 Halwakki-Wakkai52 Hawadiga53 Hugar54 Idiga55 Jogi56 Kaniyan57 Kanjir Bhat58 Katik59 Takankar60 Kashikapadi61 Katabar62 Kotari63 Kolari64 Kote Kshatriya65 Kolla66 Kuruba67 Kumbara68 Kudubi69 Kurma70 Ladara71 Malava72 Medar73 Mudhar74 Nayinda(Nayinda was not treated as a Backward Class under the 1979 G.O.)75 Neygi76 Otari77 Pamlor78 Panguaul79 Panika80 Pategar81 Rajput82 Rayarawat83 Reinudas84 Satani85 Sansia86 Satarkar87 Sikkaligara88 Somavamsha Kshatriya89 Tilari90 Tigala91 Uppara92 Vaidu93 Vasudev


94 Veer95 Vishwakarma96 Vokkaliga97 Yeralu98 Yerkala99 MuslimV Scheduled CasteVI Scheduled TribeVII Caste not Known

Reference:

Report of the Karnataka Third Backward Class Commission, Vol. I; O. Chinappa Reddy, 1990; Pg. No. 69-72.


Following Castes have been Identified as Socially and Educationally Backward (IIIrd Backward Class Commission, Karnataka)Sl. No. Castes1 Agamudi2 Agasa3 Ambalakaran4 Baandhi5 Bavaji6 Beda7 Bestha8 Bhamta9 Bhatraju10 Bogad11 Budubuduki12 Chunchar13 Dasari14 Devadasi15 Devadiga16 Ghisade17 Golla18 Gondali19 Goniga20 Gurav21 Gurkha22 Halwakki Wakkal23 Hawadiga24 Idiga25 Jogi26 Kanjirbhat27 Kashikapadi28 Katabar29 Katik30 Kolari31 Kudubi32 Kumbara33 Kurma34 Kuruba35 Ladara36 Malava37 Medar38 Mudhar39 Nayinda40 Otari41 Pamlor42 Pangual43 Panika44 Raya Rawath45 Rainudas46 Sansia47 Satani48 Satarkar49 Siddi


50 Sikkaligara51 Somavamsha Arya Kshatriya52 Takankar53 Tewar54 Tigala55 Tilari56 Uppara57 Vaidu58 Vasudev59 Veer60 Viswakarma61 Yerkalu62 Yerkala63 Muslim64 Buddhist65 Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe converts Christianity

Reference:


Advanced Communities (IIIrd Backward Class Commission, Karnataka)Sl. No. Castes1 Ambalavasi2 Balija3 Brahmin4 Bunt5 Darji6 Devanga7 Ganiga8 Gatti9 Gudigara10 Hoogar11 Jetti12 Kaniyan13 Kodagaru14 Kote Kshatriya15 Kshatriya16 Lingayat17 Maratha18 Mudaliyar19 Nagartha20 Nayar21 Neygi22 Pategar23 Rajput24 Raju Kshatriya25 Sadaru26 Vaisya27 Vokkaliga28 Christian29 Jain


30 Parsi31 Sikh32 Urs

Reference:



Having considered all aspects of the matter, I finally and firmly recommend that the following Caste/Community/Tribe/Religious/Occupational groups and sub-groups of people may be classified as Socially and Educationally Backward Classes for the purpose of both Article 15 (4) and Article 16 (4) of the constitution. I do not think that, as at present, there is either justification or necessity to draw up separate lists for the purposes of the two articles particularly because of the uniform and consistent pattern which has emerged. I have divided the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes identified by me into three categories. Category III consists of the occupational groups. Categories I and II is made on the basis of the comparative backwardness of the community either so extremely backward Socially and Educationally on are so small in number that they cannot possibly hope to compete with the larger groups or those who, though Socially and Educationally, Backward are more advanced than themselves. The reservation in favour of Category-I shall be 5%, the reservation in favour of category – II shall be 28% and the reservation in favour of Category-III shall be 5%.

Category - I

1. Agamudi

2. Ambalakaran with synonyms Ambalakaran and Ambalakaran

3. Bavandhi

4. Bavaji with Synonyms Bavaji, Atit, Bairagi, Bavani, Byragi, Daurigosavi, Davari, Gosayi, Gusai, Helava (including the Lingayat sub-groups), Helova, Hoveva, Nandiwala, Nathapanthi and Pichhigunta

5. Bestha with synonyms Bestha, Ambiga, (including the Lingayat sub-group), Barki, Besther, Bhoyi (including the Lingayat sub-groups), Bundi-Bethar, Daalji, Daavat, Gabit, Galadakonkani, Ganga Makkalu, Gangakula, Gangamatha (including the Lingayat sub-group), Gangamathastha, Gangaputra, Gowrimatha, Gunde-Bestha, Barakanthra, Jalagara, Kabbaliga, Kabber, Kabbalilga, Kabbili, Kahar, Kharvi, Koli, Kolimahadev, Maddar, Meenagar, Mogaveera, Moger, Mukkavam, Parivara, Siviyar, Sunagara (including the Lingayat sub-group) and Thoreya.

6. Bhamta with synonyms Bhamta, Bhompta, Paradeshi-Bhampta, Takari

7. Bhatraju

8. Bogad with synonyms Bogad, Begadim Bagali and Bogadi.

9. Budubuduki with synonyms Budubuduki, Buduki, Chhetri, Devari, Garadi, Giddiki, Joshi, Kichagara, Killikyata, Modiga, Pansa, Panasa, Pingale and Sadajoshi.


10. Chunchar

11. Dasari with synonymsDasari, Chakaravadya-Dasa, Dang-Dasa and Dombi-Dasaru.

12. Devadasi with synonyms Devadasi, Basavi, Bhavin, bogam, Gamika, Kalavant, Nat, Natuva and Patramela.

13. Ghisade with synonyms Ghisadi and Ghisade.

14. Goniga with synonyms Goniga, 24-Male-Telgu Chetty, Goniga-Chetty, Sadusetry and Salaparu.

15. Gurava with synonyms Gurav, Tamballa and Tambli.

16. Gurkha

17. Halwakki-Wakkal with synonyms Halwakki Wakkl, Atte-Vokkalu, Gam Gawada, Gam Vokkalu, Grame-Volkalu, Halakki-Vokkalu, Kare-Vokkalu, Kunchavakkal, Shilwakkal and Vakkal.

18. Hawadiga with synonyms Hawadiga and Hawagar.

19. Jogi with synonyms Jogi, Brahma-Kapali, Jogar, Jogtin, Kapalim Raval, Ravalil, Sanjogi and Sanyasi.

20. Kanjirbhat with synonyms Kanjirbhat and Kanjar.

21. Kashikapadi with synonyms Kashikapadi and Tirumalil.

22. Katabar.

23. Katik with synonyms Katik, Aray, Are-Kesai, Ari-Katikelu, Kalal-Khatik, Kasab, Kasai, Maratti and Suryavamsha Kshatriya.

24. Kolari with synomyms Kolari, Kalayiri and Koleri.

25. Kolla with syhnonyms Kolla and Kollala.

26. Kotari

27. Kudubi

28. Kurma withsynonyms Kurma and Kurmi.

29. Ladara with synonyms Ladar, Lad and Yeleyar.

30. Malave

31. Medar with synonymys Medar( including with Linghayat sub-group), Better, Burned, Gauriga, Bouriga, Gowri, Gowri Maratha, Gowriga.

32. Mudhar

33. Otari

34. Pamlor


35. Pangual with synonyms Pangual and Pangusal.

36. Panika

37. Rayarawath with synonyms Raya Rawath and Ravat.

38. Reinudas

39. Sansia

40. Satarkar

41. Siddi

42. Sikkaligara with synonyms Sikkaligare and Shikalgar.

43. Somavamsa Arya Kshtriya with synonyms Somavansha Arya Kshtriya, Chitara, Chitragar, Digwan, Jeenagare, Najabund, Nalabund and Tamjbat.

44. Takankar

45. Twear with synonyms Twear, Kalari, Kallar and Marava.

46. Tilari with synonyms Tilari and Tirali.

47. Uppara with synonyms Uppara(including the Lingayat sub-grupu), Beldar, Chunar, Gavadi, Goundi, Kallur Kutiga Uppara, Lonari, Melu-sakkreyavaru, Melusakkare, Namada-Upp[ara, Psdit, Padithi, Padi, Sagara, Sunnagara( including the Lingayat (sub-group), Sunna-Uppara, Uppaliga, Uppaliga Shetty, Uppaliyan, Uppera, Yakalara and Yekkali.

48. Vaidu

49. Vasudev

50. Veer with synonyms Veer and Veeramsti.

51. Yearalu and

52. Yerkala with synonyms Yerkala, Erakala, Kaikadi, Koragar, Kormasetty and kunchi.

Category – II

1. Agasa with synonyms Agasa (including the Lingayat sub-group); Chakala, Dhobi, madivala (including the Lingayat sub-group). Mannan, PArit, Rajaka, Sakala, Vannan and Velluthedan.

2. Beda with synonyms Beda, Bagri, Baori, Bendar, Berad, Boya, Byada, Chigari, Betagar, Haranshikari, Hirshikari, Myasa-Nayaka, Naik, Naikamakkalu, Naikwadi, Nirshikari, Palegar, Parivara-Nayakas, Phasachari, Phasechar, Ramoshi, Talwar boya, Urs-Nayaka, Vaghari, Valmiki (including the Lingayat sub-group), Valmikimakkalu, Vedan and Wagiri.

3. Devadiga with synonyms Devadiga, Devali, Moyili, Padiar, Seregara, Servegar, Sheregar and supling.


4. Golla with synonyms Golla, Adavigolla, Anubaru, Asthanagolla, Atanabaru, Gauli, Gavali, Gavli, Gopala, Gowli (including the Lingayat sub-group), Hanabar, Kavadi, Kolayan, Konar, Konnur, Krishns Golla, Manaiyani, Urali and Yadav.

5. Idiga with synonyms Idiga, Bandhari, Belchad, Billava, Deevar, Desha Bhandaro, Devar Divaramakkalu, Ediga, Ezhava, Gamalla, Goundla, Hale-Paikaru, Halepaik, Illavan, Kalal, Malayali Billava, Nadar, Namadhari and Thiyan.

6. Kumbara with synonyms Kumabara (including the Lingayat sub-group), Chakrasali, Gunagi, Koyava, Kula, Kulala, Kumbar, Kumbard, Kummara, Kusavan, Moolya and Sajjan-Kunbara.

7. Kuruba with synonyms Kuruba (including the Lingayat sub-group), Bharwad, Dhanagar, Gorava, Halumatha, Kurab, Kuruban and Kurumba.

8. Nayinda with synonyms Nayinda, Ambattan, Bajanthri, (including the Lingayat sub-groups), Bandari (including the Lingayat sub-group), Chouriya, Hadapada (including the Lingayat sub-group), Hajama, Kavutiyan, Kelasi, Kshaurika (including the Lingayat sub-group), Kshowrad, Mahale, Mangala, Melagara, Nadiga, Napitha, Navaliga (including the Lingayat sub-group), Navi (including the Lingayat sub-group), Nayanaja Kshatriya, Nhavi and Savitha.

9. Satani with synonyms Satani, Chattada Srivaishanava, Kadri Vaishnava, Sameraya, Sattadaval and Sattadavan.

10. Tigala with synonyms Tigala, Agni-Vamsha Kshatriya, Agnivanni, Agnikula Kshatriya, Dharmaraja Kapu, Palli, Shambhukula Kshatriyal, Thigala, Vanniar and Vannikula Kshatriya.

11. Vishwakarma with their synonyms Achari, Akkasale (including the Lingayat sub-group), Ausala, Badigar (including the Lingayat sub-group), Badiwadla, Bailapatar, Bailu Akkasali, Bailu-Kammara, Bogara, Chaptegar, Charodi, Daivagnya Brahmin, Gejjegara, Kambar, Kammalan, Kammara (including the Lingayat sub-group), Kamsala (including the Lingayat sub-group), Kamsan, Kanchagar, Kanchera, Kanchori, Kanchugara, Kansar, Kasar, Lohar, Mesta, Panchal (including the Lingayat sub-group), Pattar, Silpi, Sonagar, Sonar, Soni, Sutar, Tacchan, Thattan and Viswa Brahmin.

12. Muslim

13. Buddhist and

14. Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Converts to Christianity.

Category - III

Agricultural labourers not owning any land or not owning more than one hectare of rainfed dry land or its equivalent, handloom weavers not owning more than two looms and working for wages or on pieccerate basis, construction workers, automobile drivers, conductors and cleaners, auto and cycle rickshaw drivers, employees in factories and ‘shops and Establishments’ (excluding those employed in managerial, supervisory or ministerial capacity), workers engaged in road, bridge and railway track work and irrigation projects, pushcart, pavement and street hawkers and vendors, carpenters, blacksmiths, mechanics, plumbers, painters, electricians and the like employed on wages, hamalis, those engaged in the menial occupations such as sweepers and cobblers, those engaged in the occupations of butchers,


fisherman and other offensive or noxious occupations, those engaged in domestic service and all others manual workers employed on daily wages,

I recommend that no one should be entitled to the benefit of reservation either under article 15(4) or under article 16(4).

1. Either of whose parents is a class-I or class-II Officer in the service of the Government or holds and equivalent post in a Public Sector undertaking or is employed under a private employer and draws a salary which is not less than that of a Class – II Officer.

2. Either of whose parents is a Professional i.e. a) Doctor, b) Lawyer, c)Chartered Accountant, d) Income Tax Consultant, e) Financial or Management Consultant, f) Dental Surgeon and g) Engineer or Architect.

3. Both of whose parents are graduates.

4. Either of whose parents is an Income Tax Assessee,

5. Either of whose parents is assessed to Sales Tax and

6. Either of whose parents or both together own more than 8 hectares of or rainfed dry land or its equivalent.

The following table is based on Consolidated caste-wise distribution of students admitted to various professional and post-graduate colleges in 1988 ( Page 87-89).

SN Caste % of total students (A)

% of population: Caste to Total (B)

6 Balija 1.51 1.2015 Bunt 0.90 0.7518 Darzi 0.50 0.2922 Devanga 1.04 0.6723 Ganiga 0.63 0.4026 Golla 1.32 1.3233 Hugar 0.14 0.0235 Jatti 0.03 0.0142 Kodagaru 0.30 0.2146 Kote

Kshatriya0.09 0.07

47 Kshatriya 0.78 0.3953 Lingayath 15.68 15.3359 Nagratha 0.02 0.0267 Pategar 0.07 0.0268 Rajput 0.20 0.1472 sadaru 0.04 0.0590 Vokkliga 11.63 10.8095 Christian 2.30 2,07

The following table is based on Consolidated Statement of Recruitment prior to 1986( Page 108-109).

SN Caste Caste-wise percentage to total candidates selected

Percentage of population: Caste to Total

6 Balija 1.42 1.20www.youthforequality.com 35

17 Darzi 0.90 0.2922 Devanga 1.55 0.6722 Ganiga 0.51 0.4023 Gatti 0.018 0.00825 Golla 1.54 1.3233 Hugar 0.09 0.0242 Kodagaru 0.35 0.2146 Kote

Kshatriya0.07 0.07

53 Lingayath 17.70 15.3359 Nagratha 0.07 0.0267 Pategar 0.14 0.0268 Rajput 0.27 0.1472 sadaru 0.09 0.0590 Vokkliga 11.99 10.8096 Jain 0..94 0.78

Some of the castes which were declared Advanced by different Commissions in Karnataka

Castes

Third (Chinappa Reddy) Backward Class Commission(1990)

Second (Venkataswamy ) Backward Class Commission, 1985

First ( Havanur ) Backward Class Commission, 1975

State List Entry Number

Central list

15(4) 16(4) 15(4) 16(4) Serial Number ( Entry Number)

1 Ambalavasi A A A B B IIA-14 4 (58)

2 BalijaA A A B A IIIA-3a 14

(167)3 Bunt A A A A A IIIB-4a

4 DarjiA A A B B IIA-74 42

(157)

5 DevangaA A A B B IIA-75a 44

(158)

6 GanigaA A A B A IIA-78 52

(164)

7 GattiA A A A A IIA-72 53

(152)

8 GudigaraA A A A A IIA-73 62

(153)9 Jetti A A A A A II-90

10 KaniyanA A A B B IIA-48 84

(106)11 Kodagaru A A A A A IIIA-212 Kote

KshatriyaA A A B B IIA-93 103(10

7)13 Kshatriya A A A A A IIA-9414 Lingayat A** A A A A IIIB-1 114


(176)#

15 MarathaA A A A A IIIB-2 110(18

2)

16 NeygiA A A B B IIA-76 134

(159)

17 PategarA A A B B IIA-77 145

(160)

18 RajputA A A B A IIA-81 152

(165)

19Raju Kshatriya

A A A A A IIA-98

20 Sadaru A A A A A IIA-89

21 VokkaligaA A A B B IIIA-1 183

(156)@22 Christian A A* *A A A IIIB-323 Jain A A A A A IIIB-5

(*) Except SC converts to Christianity

(**) Except some occupational groups

(#) Only occupational groups

(@) Only rural areas

(A) Advanced

(B) Backward


the first backward class commission was …youthforequality.com/affirmative-actions/development...

Documents