Muslim OBCs
1. Introduction
The primary intent of this chapter is to look at
Muslim-OBCs from the perspective of affirmative action.
Therefore, the most pertinent categories are Hindu-OBCs and
Muslim-OBCs. However, in order to understand the intra-community
variations, it is necessary to provide comparative data
regarding the rest of the Muslims (referred to as Muslim-Gen
from now onwards). This chapter draws from a wide array of data,
both secondary and primary. Sociological studies on Muslim
social stratification have been drawn upon to comprehend the
complexity of castes or biradaris among Muslims in India.
Studies on backward class movements, analysis of Constituent
Assembly Debates and the various landmark judgements of the
Supreme Court and the High Courts have been of great help in
understanding the historicity of the emergence of the category
‘Other Backward Classes’.
3. Muslim OBCs: A Profile
Sociological studies on the social structure of
Muslims in India have emphasized on the presence of descent
based social stratification among them. Features of the Hindu
caste system, such as hierarchical ordering of social groups,
endogamy and hereditary occupation have been found to be amply
present among the Indian Muslims as well. The Census of India,
1901 listed 133 social groups wholly or partially Muslim. The
present day Muslim Society in India is divided into four major
groups: (i) the Ashrafs who trace their origins to
foreign lands such as Arabia, Persia, Turkistan or Afghanistan,
(ii) the upper caste Hindus who converted to Islam, (iii) the
middle caste converts whose occupations are ritually clean, (iv)
the converts from the erstwhile untouchable castes, Bhangi
(scavenger), Mehtar (sweeper), Chamar (tanner), Dom and so on.
These four groups are usually placed into two
broad categories, namely, ‘ashraf’ and ‘ajlaf’.
The former, meaning noble, includes all Muslims of foreign blood
and converts from higher castes. While ‘ajlaf’ meaning
degraded or unholy, embraces the ritually clean occupational
groups and low ranking converts. In Bihar, U.P and Bengal,
Sayyads, Sheikhs, Moghuls and Pathans constitute the ‘ashrafs’.
The ‘ajlaf’, are carpenters, artisans, painters, graziers,
tanners, milkmen etc. According to the Census of 1901, the
ajlaf category includes ‘the various classes of converts who
are known as Nao Muslim in Bihar and Nasya in North Bengal. It
also includes various functional groups such as that of the
Jolaha or weaver, Dhunia or cotton carder, Kulu or oil presser,
Kunjra or vegetable seller, Hajjam or barber, Darzi or tailor,
and the like.’ The 1901 Census also recorded the presence of a
third category called Arzal: ‘It consists of the very
lowest castes, such as the Halalkhor, Lalbegi, Abdal, and Bediya...’
A similar pattern of descent based social
stratification is discernible in other regions as well. In
Kerala, the Moplahs of Malabar, are divided into five ranked
sections called the Thangals, Arabis, Malbaris, Pusalars and
Ossans. The Thangals trace their descent from the Prophet’s
daughter, Fatima, and are of the highest rank. Next in rank are
the Arabis, who claim descent from the Arab men and local women
and retain their Arab lineage. The Malbaris are next in rank.
They have lost their Arab lineage and follow matrilineal
descent. The Pusalars are the converts from Hindu fishermen
called Mukkuvan, the new Muslims. They have low status. The
Ossans are the barbers, and by virtue of their occupation, they
rank lowest. In Andhra Pradesh, a field study conducted in 1987
found hierarchically arranged endogamous groups among Muslims.
At the top of the ladder were those claiming foreign descent—Syeds,
Shaikh, Pathan and Labbai (descendants of Arab traders who took
native wives). At the lowest level were groups with ‘unclean’
occupations-Dudekula (cotton cleaners), Hazam (barbers) and
Fakir-budbudki (mendicants).
Muslim groups currently bracketed under the
category ‘OBC’ come essentially from the non-ashraf section of
the Muslim population. They are the converts from the middle and
lower caste Hindus and are identified with their traditional
occupation. A study of a village in Uttar Pradesh could identify
eighteen such groups, for example, Julahas (weavers), Mirasis
(singers), Darzis (tailors), Halwais (sweetmakers), manihars (banglemakers)
and so on. The 1911 Census listed some 102 caste groups among
Muslims in Uttar Pradesh, at least 97 of them came from the non-ashraf
category. Many such groups such as the Rajputs, Kayasthas,
Koeris, Koris, Kumhars, Kurmis, Malis, Mochis, were common among
both Hindus and Muslims.
Since the Constitutional (Scheduled Caste)
Order, 1950, popularly known as the Presidential Order (1950),
restricts the SC status only to Hindu groups having ‘unclean’
occupations, their non-Hindu equivalents have been bracketed
with the middle caste converts and declared OBC. Thus, the OBCs
among Muslims constitute two broad categories. The halalkhors,
helas, lalbegis or bhangis (scavengers), dhobis (washermen),
nais or hajjams (barbers), chiks (butchers), faqirs (beggars)
etc belonging to the ‘Arzals’ are the ‘untouchable
converts’ to Islam that have found their way into the OBC list.
The momins or julahas (weavers), darzi or idiris (tailors),
rayeens or kunjaras (vegetable sellers) are Ajlafs or
converts from ‘clean’ occupational castes. Thus, one can discern
three groups among Muslims: (1) those without any social
disabilities, the ashrafs; (2) those equivalent to Hindu
OBCs, the ajlafs, and (3) those equivalent to Hindu SCs,
the arzals. Those who are referred to as Muslim OBCs
combine (2) and (3).
4. Approaches to Affirmative Action for
Muslim OBCs
At the all-India level, the issue of OBCs has
been attempted to be addressed by instituting two backward
classes commissions with the mandate to evolve the criteria of
backwardness, identify social groups on that basis and suggest
measures to ameliorate their condition. Of the two, the report
of the first commission (Kaka Kalelkar Commission) was rejected
by the Union government for having used ‘caste’ and not the
economic criterion for identifying backward classes. The report
of the second commission (Mandal Commission) was partially
implemented in 1991 more than a decade after it was submitted.
Besides these two attempts at the Centre, various state
governments instituted their own backward classes commissions
and have evolved distinct approaches to reservation of backward
classes.
4.1 Kaka Kalelkar Commission (1955) and B. P.
Mandal Commission (1980)
The First Backward Classes Commission submitted
its report in 1955. The Report presented a list of 2,399 castes
and communities considered backward, 837 of these were
considered ‘most backward’ requiring special attention. Thus the
category, backward classes, was further bifurcated into two
categories - the backwards and the most backwards. The list
included not only backward groups from amongst the Hindus, but
also non-Hindus, including Muslims as well. The Commission’s
Report was the first instance wherein the presence of ‘backward
communities’ among Muslims (and other religious minorities)
received recognition in official parlance. The caste basis did
not find approval from the chairperson of the Commission and one
of the reasons cited was the assumed castelessness of Muslims
and Christians: "My eyes were however open to the dangers of
suggesting remedies on the caste basis when I discovered that it
is going to have a most unhealthy effect on the Muslim and
Christian sections of the nation."
The second All India Backward Classes
Commission, the Mandal Commission, submitted its report in 1980.
The Commission evolved eleven indicators, a mix of caste and
class features, for assessing social and educational
backwardness. The Commission saw castes as the ‘building bricks
of Hindu social structure’ that despite the Constitutional
commitment to establish a casteless and egalitarian society had
continued to persist. It arrived at an exhaustive list of 3,743
castes that were declared as backward. The Commission, in
principle, accepted that occurrence of caste or caste-like
feature was not restricted to Hindu society, its influence was
also found among non-Hindu groups, Muslims, Sikhs and
Christians, as well. Based on the data provided by the 1931
Census and field surveys conducted at the instance of the
commission, at least 82 different social groups among Muslims
were declared OBCs. The Commission however desisted from
employing ‘caste’ as a criterion to identify non-Hindu OBCs as
‘these religions are (were) totally egalitarian in their
outlook’. The Commission, however, refrained from invoking
‘poverty’ too as the sole criterion. The ‘rough and ready’
criteria that the Commission evolved had two conditions:
a. All ‘untouchables’ converted to any non-Hindu
religion. In the Muslim case, they are the Arzals.
b. Such occupational communities which are known
by the name of their traditional hereditary occupation and whose
Hindu counterparts have been included in the list of Hindu OBCs.
Among Muslims, this comprises the ajlaf category.
By clubbing the Arzals and the ajlafs
among Muslims in an all encompassing OBC category, the Mandal
Commission overlooked the disparity in the nature of
deprivations that they faced. Being at the bottom of the social
hierarchy, the Arzals are the worst off and need to be
handled separately. It would be most appropriate if they were
absorbed in the SC list, or at least in a separate category,
Most Backward Classes (MBCs), carved out of the OBCs.
4.2 Muslim OBCs and Affirmative Action in the
States
Kerala and Karnataka Model
In terms of their policy of reservation for backward
classes, Kerala and Karnataka stand out for having extended the
benefits of reservation to their entire Muslim population. This
has been achieved by including Muslims (minus the creamy layer)
as a distinct group within the broad category of backward
classes and then provided with exclusive quota. This distinct
feature of their reservation policy dates back to the colonial
period. In the erstwhile princely state of Mysore, affirmative
action began as early as in 1874 when a government decision
reserved 80% of the posts in the Police department for
non-Brahmins, Muslims and Indian Christians. In Kerala, the
demand for reservation for under-represented communities was
accepted as early as 1936 in the princely states of Travancore
and Cochin, and in Malabar even earlier, in 1921. Quotas were
fixed not only for caste groups such as the Ezhavas, but also
for religious minorities, the Muslims and sections of
Christians.
Post-Independence, on the reorganization of the
State of Mysore as Karnataka, all non-Brahmin Hindu castes and
all non-Hindu minority communities like Muslims and Christians
were declared as backward classes. In 1960, on the
recommendations of the Nagan Gowda Committee, the category
backward classes was bifurcated into backwards (28%) and more
backwards (22%). Together with the quota for SC/ST, the
magnitude of reservation rose to 68%. The Supreme Court in a
landmark judgement, however, placed 50% ceiling on the quantum
of reservation. Muslims as a whole continued to be considered as
among the backward communities. The Havanur Commission, 1972
recommended the creation of a distinct category of minority
group with reservation not exceeding 6%. The State classified
Backward Classes into three categories: (a) Most backward; (b)
More backward and (c) Backward. All Muslims whose income is less
than Rs. 2 lakh per annum have been declared backward and placed
exclusively in one of the sub-categories of ‘More Backwards’
with four percent of the seats set aside for them. According to
the information provided by the state government to this
Committee, this measure has led to a substantive rise in Muslim
share in the state government services. The number of seats
Muslims get in professional courses like Medicine, Dental and
Engineering has also increased to a considerable extent. Between
1996 to 2002, 346 Muslim students were able to secure seats in
Medicine, 258 in Dental and 3,486 in Engineering courses.
In Kerala, the reservation scheme introduced in
1952, fixed the quantum of reservation at 45% (including 10% for
SCs and STs).The beneficiaries included the Ezhavas, Kammalas,
the Nadars (Hindu and Christian), other Hindu backward castes
and SC and OBC converts to Christianity. On the reorganization
of the State in 1956, the quota for backward classes was
enhanced to 40%. Later, the scheme was modified to introduce
sub-quotas for major backward groups. A separate Muslim share
was fixed at 10% that later rose to 12%. At present, the
reservation system in Kerala is as follows: Backward Classes 40%
(Ezhavas 14%; Muslims 12%; Latin Catholics 4%; Nadars 2%;
Christian converts from S.C.s 1%; Dheevaras 1%; Other Backward
Classes 3%; Viswakarmas 3%) and S.C.s and S.T.s 10%.
Tamil Nadu Model
Tamil Nadu offers a model of affirmative action for
Muslims or Muslim OBCs that is slightly different from that
offered by Kerala and Karnataka. Unlike Kerala and Karnataka,
Muslims as a distinct category are not eligible for reservation,
yet most of the Muslim biradaris are included either in the
backward or in the most backward list. The state government has
done away with reservation on grounds of religion, yet nearly
95% of the Muslims have been included within the fold of
backward classes.
To begin with, the Muslims who were
educationally backward were given special treatment vide a
resolution dated July 29, 1872. Later it was extended to the
‘aborigines’ and low caste Hindus. As the Brahmins were grossly
over-represented in high salaried jobs, a Government Order
(1927) introduced compartmental reservation whereby the
non-Brahmins were to have 42% of the posts available and Muslims
17%.
Post-Independence, reservation was extended to
only the constitutionally recognized deprived categories, such
as the SCs, the STs and the Backward Classes. Separate quota for
Muslims was also withdrawn; rather various communities among
Muslims considered backward were included in the list of
Backward Classes. The Sattanathan Commission (1970) endorsed the
1951 categorization, it identified 105 castes/communities as
backward, and recommended 31% reservation, whereas 18% was left
for the SCs and STs. Tamil speaking Muslim groups, such as
Labbais, Deccani Muslims and others were included in the
backward list. In 1980, 31% quota for backward classes was
raised to 50% taking the total to 68%.
Following the recommendations of the Ambasankar
Commission (1982) the backward classes were split into Backward
Castes (BCs), Most Backward Classses (MBCs) and Denotified
Communities. The quantum of reservation currently is 69%; far
beyond the Supreme Court limit of 50%. The Tamil Nadu Backward
Classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of
Seats in Educational Institution and of appointments or posts in
the Services under the State) Act, 1993 was included in the 9th
Schedule through the 76th amendment of the Constitution.
Bihar Model
The ‘Karpuri formula’ as it is popularly called allows
for the bifurcation of the category backward classes into its
advanced section, the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and
relatively more deprived, the Most Backward Classes (MBCs). The
first major effort to understand the plight of backward classes
in Bihar was undertaken when the Mungeri Lal Commission was
constituted in 1971. In its report submitted in 1975, the
Commission recommended the bifurcation of the backward classes
into Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and Most Backward Classes (MBCs).
The OBC list contained 128 castes and the MBC list had 93 caste
groups. The Karpoori Thakur government in 1978 accepted the
classification made by the Mungeri Lal Commission. For the
purposes of recruitments to jobs, 8% was set aside for the OBCs,
12% for the MBCs, 14% for the SCs, 10% for the STs, 3% for women
and another 3% for the economically backward. After the carving
out of Jharkhand from Bihar, the above scheme was slightly
amended. The ST quota was reduced to 1%; the SC quota was now
fixed at 15%, 13% for OBCs, 18% for the MBCs and 3% for backward
caste women. Muslim caste groups, depending on their level of
backwardness, have been included either in the OBC or in the MBC
list. While 9 Muslim groups are in the state’s OBC list, 27 of
them form part of the MBC list.
The three different models for affirmative
action for the Muslims/Muslim backwards, as detailed above, can
be summarized as:
a. Reservation of seats for the entire Muslim
community (excluding the creamy layer): Kerala and Karnataka.
b. Reservation on the basis of backward caste/biradari
but most of the Muslim groups included covering 95% of Muslim
population: Tamil Nadu
c. Bifurcation of OBCs into backwards and most
backwards (MBCs), most of the Muslim backwards in the MBC list:
Bihar
5. Muslim OBCs Not Included in the State and
Central Lists of OBCs
Reservations for OBCs has a longer history in
the states than at the Centre. As the recommendations of the
Mandal Commission came to be accepted, the Central list of OBCs,
in the initial phase, was prepared by employing the principle of
‘commonality’. Thus, only those castes/communities listed both
in the state list and also in the list prepared by the Mandal
Commission were included in the Central list. It is not
surprising therefore that a number of castes/communities that
had either been listed only in the Mandal list or only in the
state list were left out. This discrepancy was expected to be
solved once a permanent body, namely, the National Backward
Classes Commission (NCBC) was formed. The NCBC, formed in 1993,
has issued a set of guidelines based on social, economic and
educational indicators, for castes/communities to be included in
the Central list of OBCs. The discrepancy between the two lists,
Central and State, is still evident. This is a general complaint
and not confined to Muslims alone. There are many OBC groups,
irrespective of their religion, that are present in the State
list but missing in the Central list. Madhya Pradesh, for
instance, has 91 social groups listed as OBCs in the list
recommended by the State Backward Classes Commission, but only
65 such groups have found entry in the Central list. Uttar
Pradesh has 79 castes in the state OBC list, but only 74 in the
Central list, in Rajasthan there are 74 castes in the state list
but only 65 have been accorded OBC status in the Central list.
Such discrepancy also applies in the case of
Muslim OBCs. In Madhya Pradesh, for example, there are 37
communities listed in the state list as Islamic groups, however,
only 27 of them are found in the Central list. In Bihar, after
the recent revision of the list, there are 17 OBC groups that
have not found a place in the central list. Six of them are
exclusively Muslim, namely, (i) Faqir/Diwan, (ii) Julaha/Ansari
(the synonym Momin is in the Central List), (iii) Itrfarosh/Gadheri/Itpaj/Ibrahimi,
(iv) Jat, (v) Gadaria and (vi) Surajpuri. In Uttar Pradesh, two
Muslim groups - Mirshikar and Nanbai - have not found entry in
the Central list. In Gujarat, Muslim groups such as Jilaya,
Tariya-tai, Mansuri, Arab, Sumra, Tarak, Kalal and Bahvaiya are
listed in the State’s backward list but not in the Central list.
Similarly, many Muslim groups in Maharashtra such as Mansooris,
Pan Faroshs, Ataar, Sanpagarudi, Muslim Madari, Muslim Gawli,
Darwesi, Hashmi, Nalband among others have not found entry in
the Central list.
The lists of OBCs prepared by the state
governments have also missed many underprivileged castes and
communities. There are a few groups among Muslims that have
found place in the Central list but are yet to be included in
the State lists. Kalwars in Bihar, Mansooris in Rajasthan,
Atishbazs in Uttar Pradesh, Rayeens, Kalwars, Rangwas and
Churihars in West Bengal are examples of such Muslim groups.
There are still a number of Muslim groups that have neither been
included in the State list nor in the Central list. These groups
can be identified using the information collected by
Anthropological Survey of India under its People of India
Project. In Gujarat for instance, the Project found 85 Muslim
communities, of which at least 76 are non-ashraf. In the Central
list, however, only 22 of them have found entry, whereas in the
State list, there are only 27 Muslim groups. In Bihar, according
to the Project, there are 37 castes/communities that can be
counted as non-ashraf, however, only 23 are in the Central list.
In Uttar Pradesh, the Project lists 67 communities among
Muslims, 61 of whom are occupational groups. Both the State and
the Central lists of OBCs contain only 32 of them.
6. Empirical Situation
In this section, attempt has been made to
quantify the relative deprivations that Muslims in general and
Muslim-OBCs in particular face. Different variables have been
employed, for instance, male and female work participation,
representation in various levels and sectors of public
employment, salaries and wages, per capita income, incidence of
poverty, urban and rural land holding, relative share in
education etc. to ascertain the status of Muslim OBCs vis-ŕ-vis
their Hindu counterparts and also the non-OBC Muslims or
Muslim-General. Most of these variables indicate that
Muslim-OBCs are significantly deprived in comparison to
Hindu-OBCs.
6.1 Population Distribution of Muslim OBCs
In our analysis of population share of Muslim
OBCs we will largely depend on the National Sample Survey, 61st
Round.
National Sample Survey, 61st Round
The survey data on OBCs falls short of the estimate made
by the Mandal Commission; also, there is considerable variation
in the figures provided by the two surveys, 55th and 61st Round.
Those reporting as OBCs among Muslims constitute 40.7% of the
Muslim population, as per the 61st Round. Compared to the 55th
Round when Muslim OBCs were reported to be only 31.7%, the
growth is of 9%. The pattern remains the same in both rural and
urban areas. As the NSSO provides self-reporting data, this only
reflects either an enhanced awareness of their OBC status among
the Muslim OBCs or substantive revision of the OBC list since
the last round of survey. The growth in the population share of
Hindu OBCs is also noticeable. The population share of SC/ST in
the total Hindu population remains consistent in both the
surveys. The category SC/ST and the benefits associated with it
has a longer history, more than 50 years, and therefore the
social groups included, to a large extent, are aware of their
status.
State-wise Distribution of OBC Population
In the states of Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Haryana, Muslim
OBCs constitute almost their entire Muslim population. In Kerala,
this is mainly because of the fact that Mapillas, who constitute
more than 90% of the Muslim population of the State, have been
included in the Central list. Similarly, Meo Muslims, an OBC
group, forms the bulk of the Muslim population in Haryana. The
Hindi-Urdu belt comprising Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan,
Madhya Pradesh and Jharkhand also has the majority of the
Muslims listed as OBCs. On the other hand, in the two states of
West Bengal and Assam, both with substantial population of
Muslims, the proportion of OBCs is minuscule. Thus, the benefits
attached to OBC status is denied to most Muslims residing in
these states.
Regional analysis reveals significant
inter-state differences. In 14 out of the 20 states for which
data are presented, the share of Muslim OBCs has risen in the
61st Round as compared to the previous round of survey. The
increase is the highest in Rajasthan (32 percentage points),
followed by Bihar (23 percentage points) and Uttar Pradesh (18
percentage points). A fall in their share is observed in West
Bengal, Assam, Jammu and Kashmir, Karnataka, Delhi and Himachal
Pradesh. While the change is extremely high in Delhi (24
percentage points), it is marginal in West Bengal.
The latest round of NSSO’s survey (61st Round)
estimates the OBC population share in the total population at
40.4%. Of these, 34% is the share of Hindu-OBCs and the
remaining 6.4 of M-OBCs. In the total OBC population of the
country, Muslim-OBCs have a share of 15.7%. This, as we will see
below, is not reflected in their representation either in public
employment or in educational institutions.
6.2 The Scheduled Tribe Component among
Muslims
Unlike the category Scheduled Caste, the
category Scheduled Tribe, irrespective of the religious
affiliation of the members of the tribe, is entitled for
reservation. The criterion followed for specification of a
community as scheduled tribes are indications of primitive
traits, distinctive culture, geographical isolation, shyness of
contact with the community at large and backwardness. The
criteria is not spelt out in the Constitution but has become
well established.
The Muslim component of the ST population is
very small. According to the 1991 Census, it accounts for only
0.25% of the total ST population of the country. The highest
proportion of Muslims declared as STs is found in Lakshadweep
where Muslims constitute the entire ST population (99.74%).
Muslim share in the ST population of Himachal Pradesh (7%) is
also quite significant. Elsewhere, Muslim STs are minuscule in
number. The Muslim ST population is only 1,70,428 whereas the
total population of the STs stands at 6,77,58,285 (1991 Census).
It must be noted that while STs get all
entitlements irrespective of their religious backgrounds, all
Muslims of tribal background do not get this benefit. There are
many cases of claims of ST status by Muslim groups that have
remained unattended.
6.3 Educational Conditions
Literacy Levels
Disaggregated analysis by place of residence reveal
sharp differences across SRCs in urban areas; Muslims, and in
particular Muslim-OBCs, are lagging behind Hindu-OBCs. The
literacy levels among the Muslim-OBCs is the least in rural
areas as well but the difference is not as sharp between them
and other SRCs in urban areas.
Children Not Attending Schools
Almost half of the children aged 6-12 years are not
currently attending school. The proportion of Muslim OBC
children not attending schools aged 12 years or less is much
higher than this figure. While the difference between
Muslim-OBCs and Muslim-Gen is not marked (both are about 55%),
the difference in non-attendance level between Hindu-OBCs and
Muslim-OBCs (49%, compared to 56%) is significant.
Levels of Education
A comparison across SRCs suggests that the educational
levels of Muslim-OBCs and Muslim-Gen are lower than those of
Hindu-OBCs. In general, educational levels among Muslim-OBCs are
lower than the other two SRCs; illiteracy is the highest among
this group and a lower proportion of persons in this group
complete school education or undertake graduate studies.
Achievements in Higher Education
Finally, the status of the three SRCs is examined with
respect to their attainments in the field of higher education.
Three levels of education have been used for this purpose -
general graduates and above, technical graduates and technical
diploma and certificate courses.
It can be seen that all the three SRCs have a
lower proportion of persons holding a technical/non-technical
degree or technical diploma/certificate compared to the
Hindu-OBCs. Except in the case of technical diploma/certificate
courses, Muslim-OBCs have the lowest level of achievements in
higher education; in general, Hindu-OBCs do better than the
other two SRCs. Thus, in terms of higher education also, the
Muslim-OBCs lag behind the other SRCs namely Hindu-OBCs and
Muslim-Gen.
6.4 Employment Status
Work Participation and Unemployment Rates
The work participation rate (WPR, proportion of persons
aged 15-64 years who are engaged in any economic activity
(working), either as principal or subsidiary activity) shows the
presence of a sharp difference between Hindu-OBCs (67%) and the
two Muslim SRCs (about 55%), with WPR among both categories of
Muslims being substantially lower at the all-India level. The
difference between Muslim-Gen and Muslim-OBCs, however, is
marginal (56% and 54% at the all-India level). This difference
can be observed in both rural and urban areas and among females.
Within the male population, however, differences in the WPR are
marginal.
According to the NSSO 61st Round data, while
9.2% of Muslim-OBCs of all age groups were unemployed in
2004-05, the unemployment rates were lower at 7.5 and 7.7
percent respectively for Hindu-OBCs and Muslim-Gen. Similar
differences were observed for both men and women and in rural
and urban areas.
Share of Workers in the Formal Sector
The proportion of Muslim-Gen and Muslim-OBC workers
engaged in the formal sector is below the corresponding
proportion for… According to the NSSO 61st Round data, within
the formal sector, the share of Muslim-OBCs in government/PSU
jobs was much lower than those of Hindu-OBCs and Muslim-Gen.
While 7.2% of Hindu-OBC workers in rural areas were employed in
such jobs, the shares of such workers among Muslim-Gen and
Muslim-OBCs were 5.8 and 3.4 percent respectively. The
differences in urban areas were sharper with Hindu-OBCs (11.3%)
much ahead of Muslim-Gen (7%) and Muslim-OBCs (3.5%). The
inferior employment situation of the Muslim-OBCs vis-ŕ-vis the
other two SRCs is also reflected in the fact that a much smaller
proportion of workers among them are engaged in regular
wage/salaried jobs, especially in urban areas. The proportion of
workers engaged in regular employment in rural areas ranged
between 6-7% for all the three SRCs. However, in urban areas,
the participation of Muslim OBCs (20.4%) in regular jobs was
much lower than that of Muslim-Gen (31.2%) and Hindu-OBCs
(36.4%).
In general, therefore, Muslim-OBCs are lagging
behind Muslim-Gen and Hindu-OBC categories in terms of
participation in the formal sector and jobs that provide
regularity of employment (both waged and salaried).
Differentials in Earnings
Workers can be divided into two broad categories -
casual and regular. Regular workers can be further subdivided
into those who work in public or private sectors. There is no
significant difference in wages paid to SRCs. Interestingly,
wages received by Muslim-OBCs are higher than that received by
Muslim-Gen and Hindu-OBCs. This can be observed for both male
and female workers.
Salaries paid to Hindu-OBC and Muslim employees
in both the public and private sectors are lower than the
average salaries. Muslim-Gen employees are marginally better off
than Hindu-OBC employees. Muslim-OBC employees receive salaries
that are significantly lower than the other two SRCs. This is
true for both the public as well as the private sector thus
indicating that more Muslim OBCs tend to be in low salaried jobs
as compared to other SRCs.
Among male regular workers, Muslim-OBCs are
relatively more deprived than the other two SRCs; differences
between Muslim-Gen and Hindu-OBCs, however, are marginal. In the
case of women workers, Muslim-OBC workers are less deprived in
the public sector vis-ŕ-vis the other two SRCs; in the private
sector, on the other hand, they are deprived to a greater
extent.
Distribution of Workers According to Place of
Work
The distribution of male workers by place of work is not
very different across SRCs. A large proportion belonging to all
these SRCs either work in employer’s enterprises or one’s own
enterprise/dwelling. A few differentials across SRCs can be
noticed. For example, a relatively larger proportion of Muslim-OBC
workers work in employer’s enterprises while this is lower in
construction sites.
The bulk of women workers in all SRCs work in
their own dwelling. However, the proportion of such workers
among Muslims, especially Muslim OBCs, is higher.
Muslim OBCs in Public Employment
The Committee’s estimates indicate that while out of
every hundred workers about eleven are Hindu-OBCs, only three
are Muslim-Gen and one is a Muslim-OBC. Deprivation of
Muslim-OBCs is highest in the Railways (employing more than 14
lakh workers) and in Central PSUs (for which the Committee has
received data pertaining to almost 7 lakh workers).
Representation is also low among candidates recommended for
selection by State Public Service Commissions (SPSC). Muslim-Gen
are also significantly under-represented in all sectors, and
particularly in Central Security Agencies, Central PSUs,
candidates recommended by SPSC and Universities (both teaching
and non-teaching posts). While Hindu-OBCs are also
under-represented, deprivation is less than that of Muslim-OBCs
in five out of the six agencies, and less than that of
Muslim-Gen in three out of the six agencies.
Representation in Selected Central and State
Institutions and Undertakings
All the three SRCs, Hindu-OBCs, Muslim-OBCs and
Muslim-Gen, are under-represented when their share in employment
is compared with that in population. Hindu OBCs constitute 34%
of the population but in none of the Central Organizations is
their share more than 12%. This includes even the lowest level,
i.e, Group D employees. Muslim OBCs whose share in the
population is 6.4%, have less than one percent presence in these
organizations, with the exception of central security forces
(3.6%). In the higher echelons of these services, they are
nearly absent. In the central security forces (including BSF,
CRPF, CISF and others), Muslim OBCs are better represented than
Muslim-Gen (3.6%, compared to 1% Muslim-Gen). They however still
fall short of their share in population. It is noteworthy that
in the case of Muslims, even the non-OBC section of their
population is significantly under-represented (varying from 3%
to 4.5%).
Representation in State Services
In the states the situation is better for the Hindu
OBCs. Although still short of proportionate representation,
their share in the upper and middle levels is much higher than
that in the central organizations. However, a large proportion
of the Hindu-OBCs find employment at the Group D level. While
Muslim-Gen has a comparatively better representation in Group A
and D posts of state services, their representation in middle
levels posts is marginal. Muslim OBCs have better share at the
Group A level, but their presence is insignificant at all other
levels.
Representation in Universities
Out of almost 1.5 lakh persons working in Universities,
the representation of Hindu-OBCs among faculty members is more
or less the same as their share in population. Muslims, both OBC
and non-OBCs, seem to have only a token presence in the
universities.
This analysis indicates that while Hindu-OBCs
have been able to reap the benefits of reservation of posts in
universities, the representation of both Muslim-OBCs and
Muslim-Gen in different sectors remains grossly inadequate.
6.5 Economic Status
Incidence of Poverty
The incidence of poverty is measured by the proportion
of poor persons (referred to as Head Count Ratio). All-India
estimates show that the incidence of poverty is highest among
Muslim-OBCs (38), followed by Muslim-General (35). In contrast
the proportion of poor among Hindu-OBCs (27) is lower than even
the national average (28).
The higher incidence of poverty among
Muslim-OBCs and Muslim-Gen, compared to the national average and
Hindu-OBCs, can be observed in both urban and rural areas. The
difference between Muslim OBCs and Hindu-OBCs is particularly
striking in urban areas. The proportion of poor Muslim-Gen
persons is almost 9 percentage points higher than among
Hindu-OBCs. The Muslim-OBCs were even worse off with the share
of poor persons being 14 percentage points higher than that of
Hindu-OBCs.
Monthly Per Capita Expenditure (MPCE)
The MPCE of the three SRCs is much lower than the
national average. Among the three SRCs, the MPCE of Muslim-OBCs
is the least. The condition of Muslim-Gen is marginally better
off than the other two SRCs as reflected in their MPCE. In urban
areas, also, the MPCE of the three SRCs is lower than the
national average. As was the case with poverty levels, however,
the difference between SRCs is striking in urban areas. The MPCE
of both Muslim groups is much lower than the national average.
Moreover, the MPCE of Muslim-OBCs is much lower as compared with
Muslim-Gen in urban areas. In rural areas, differences between
MPCE of SRCs are narrower. The MPCE of Muslim-OBCs is about the
same as the national average, while MPCE of Muslim-Gen is
marginally lower than that of Hindu-OBCs.
Inequalities Among SRCs
At the all-India level, there are marginal differences
in inequality levels between the three SRCs being analysed.
Overall, the inequality levels are somewhat higher among
Muslim-OBCs as compared to other SRCs. Given the discussion
above, higher levels of poverty are combined with relatively
higher levels of inequality.
Ownership and Average Size of Land Holdings
Average land holdings of Hindu-OBCs are clearly much
better (about twice) than that of Muslim-OBCs and Muslim-Gen. In
fact the average land holdings of Hindu-OBCs (1.9 acres) are
higher than even that of the national average (1.7 acres). The
differences in average land holdings of Muslim-Gen and
Muslim-OBCs are almost the same (1.0 and 0.7 acres,
respectively).
7. Concluding Comments
As per the latest round of NSSO survey, Muslim
OBCs constitute 40.7% of the total Muslim population. They are
also a sizeable component (15.7%) of the total OBC population of
the country. The NSSO survey however fails to provide
disaggregated figures across individual castes/groups included
in the OBC lists of the Centre and the various states. As a
result, intra-OBC differentials along castes/groups in terms of
crucial indicators such as educational attainment and employment
share cannot be estimated. The Committee therefore is of the
opinion that enumeration of castes/groups as part of the
decennial Census exercise is critical to assess the equitable
distribution of benefits meant for groups included in the
category, OBC.
It is important to underline that Muslims in
India are not a monolith, and this is what our analyses across
various indicators of human development also suggests. While
Hindu-OBCs continue to be relatively deprived in terms of the
all-India data, the Muslim community as a whole is lagging
behind Hindu-OBCs. However, overall, the conditions of
Muslim-OBCs are worse than those of Muslim-Gen. The abysmally
low representation of Muslim OBCs suggests that the benefits of
entitlements meant for the backward classes are yet to reach
them.
To explore the differentials across the SRCs
further, an exploratory exercise was undertaken to assess if the
proportions of Muslim-OBC, Muslim-Gen and Hindu-OBC differ
significantly in high and low income groups. It is noteworthy
that, as compared to other SRCs (except SC/ST), the share of
Muslim-OBCs and Muslim-Gen population is significantly higher in
low income groups. Within the Muslim community, a larger
percentage of Muslim-OBCs fall in the low income category as
compared to Muslim-Gen. In contrast, much smaller share of
Muslim persons belong to the high income category.
Interestingly, a larger share of SCs/STs belong to the high
income group as compared to Muslims. Within Muslims, Muslim-OBCs
are slightly lagging behind the Muslim-Gen in the high income
group.
Based on the arguments and data presented here,
it is logical to suggest that Muslims in India, in terms of
their social structure, consist of three groups - ashrafs,
ajlafs and arzals. The three groups require
different types of affirmative action. The second group,
ajlafs/OBCs, need additional attention which could be
similar to that of Hindu-OBCs. The third group, those with
similar traditional occupation as that of the SCs, may be
designated as Most Backward Classes (MBCs) as they need
multifarious measures, including reservation, as they are
‘cumulatively oppressed’. |
|