OBCs earning over Rs 6 lakh annually won't get quotas

March 16, 2013

OBCs_EaringNew Delhi, Mar 16: OBCs earning over Rs 6 lakh annually will not be eligible for reservations in jobs and education with a group of ministers on Friday deciding to raise the 'creamy layer' bar from Rs 4.50 lakh as part of the revision done every four years.

The increase, however, marks a setback for the 'backward lobby' of ministers that blocked the proposal for fixing creamy layer at Rs 6 lakh in the Cabinet last June, arguing it did not reflect the fall in value of currency and inflation. 'Creamy layer' is the income limit beyond which OBCs are not eligible for quotas.

A group of ministers headed by P Chidambaram is learnt to have weighed in favour of retaining the income level suggested by social justice ministry that ran into resistance in the Cabinet last year. It included HRD minister Pallam Raju, social justice minister Selja and MoS in PMO V Narayanasamy.

While there were murmurs that the bar be raised further, the finance minister argued that keeping the quota net too high would crowd out the genuinely poor and the needy among backwards.

The higher the income ceiling, more the people would qualify for reservations with a greater inclusion of affluent sections. It is seen to disadvantage the poor among OBCs.

While the creamy layer would be final only once approved by the Union Cabinet, Narayanasamy's presence in the GoM suggests a sense of finality.

Narayanasamy, along with petroleum minister Veerappa Moily and overseas Indian affairs minister Vayalar Ravi, had opposed the Rs 6 lakh proposal in the Cabinet, saying it be at least Rs 7 lakh. The resistance forced the prime minister to refer the issue for consultations.

The Chidambaram-led ministerial panel's move to keep a "uniform Rs 6 lakh salary bar" is way below the recommendation made by National Commission for Backward Classes that it should be Rs 12 lakh in urban areas and Rs 9 lakh in rural areas.

The social justice ministry is learnt to have rebuffed NCBC on various counts. It argued against dual creamy layer for rural and urban areas, and questioned the panel for not doing due diligence.

The income ceiling was introduced at Rs 1 lakh in 1993 and was revised to Rs 2.50 lakh in 2004 and Rs 4.50 lakh in 2008.

As against NCBC's suggestion of Rs 12 lakh that reflected Mandal satraps' long-held aversion for the concept of creamy layer, the Centre seems to have been deterred by the backlash of a huge hike.

While there can be judicial challenge arguing that setting the bar too low is designed to neutralize the income ceiling, there are fears in the ruling dispensation that quota for rich OBCs would lead to demands from upper castes that their poor too be given reservations.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 18,2020

Ayodhya, Jul 18: The Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teertha Kshetra Trust has invited Prime Minister Narendra Modi to lay the foundation stone of a grand Ram Temple in Ayodhya either on August 3 or 5, both auspicious dates, said a spokesperson.

PM Modi had announced the formation of the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teertha Kshetra Trust on February 5.

Mahant Kamal Nayan Das, the spokesperson of Ram Mandir Trust president Nritya Gopal Das said, "We have suggested two auspicious dates -- August 3 and 5 -- for the prime minister's visit based on calculations of movements of stars and planets."

After a protracted legal tussle, the Supreme Court had on November 9 last year paved the way for the construction of a Ram Temple by a Trust at the disputed site in Ayodhya and directed the Centre to allot an alternative 5-acre plot to the Sunni Waqf Board for building a new mosque at a "prominent" place in the holy town in Uttar Pradesh.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 25,2020

New Delhi, Mar 25: The total number of positive coronavirus cases in India have climbed to 606, said Ministry of Health and Family Welfare on Wednesday.
The total number of active COVID-19 cases in the country so far stands at 553, while the number of people who have been cured or discharged stands at 42.
Ten people have died from the disease while one case has migrated, the Ministry further informed.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Tuesday announced a 21-day lockdown in the entire country to deal with the spread of coronavirus, saying that "social distancing" is the only option to deal with the disease, which spreads rapidly.
In a televised address to the nation, Prime Minister Modi said that it is vital to break the chain of the disease and experts have said that at least 21 days are needed for it.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 4,2020

New Delhi, Jun 4: CSIR Director-General Shekhar Mande said on Thursday that the World Health Organisation's (WHO) decision to halt hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) drug trial was taken in haste and the global body should have actually analysed the data before making the decision.

"I firmly believe that WHO decision was taken in haste it was a kind of knee jerk reaction they should have actually analyse the data on their own before temporarily suspend the trials that is my personal opinion," Mande said.

India's nodal government agency ICMR (Indian Council of Medical Research) overseeing the country's response to the coronavirus pandemic last month wrote to the WHO citing differences in dosage standards between Indian and international trials that could explain the efficacy issues of HCQ in treating COVID-19 patients.

In addition, Dr Sheela Godbole, National Coordinator of the WHO-India Solidarity Trial and Head of the Division of Epidemiology, ICMR-National AIDS Research Institute also wrote a letter via an email to Dr Soumya Swaminathan, Chief Scientist at World Health Organisation.

In a letter, Dr Godbole stated: "There was no reason to suspend the trial for safety concern," attributing it to the current RECOVERY data which differs significantly from the non-randomised assessment by Mehra et al, a scientific paper.

Referring to the letter, the CSIR head said, "We don't know what actually happened behind the scenes but the hypothesis is that because of the paper published in Lancet. It is a very well known journal and if Lancet has done due vigilance in publishing the paper. 

Therefore, the WHO thought the paper's findings are right that's why WHO hold based on what is published on Lancet. The WHO shouldn't have accepted it immediately this should have taken their own due vigilance to find out that study is right or not."

DG CSIR said because there is a global outcry it must have put pressure on both Lancet as well as WHO and both of them now retracted from their original position. "WHO has started a trial again and Lancet has put an expression of concern on their website both of these are very welcome development for science," he said.

"So I am pretty sure that Lancet would have published the reports only after seeing somewhere the drug failed to work," Mande said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.