The Mandel Commission Report 2.00 am
The Mandal commission was absolutely unnecessary. The Mandal Commission report came in for nation-wide condemnation from one section of community, while is garnered support from the rest of the population. Parmanand Singh, in Mandal Report Will Only Perpetuate Stratification, in The Times of India, reports on the issues facing the V.P Singh government at the center, on the implementation of the Mandal commission. During his exhaustive report; tracing the history of caste system in India and the need for further reconciliation on reservations for other castes apart from Backward Castes (BCs) and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, Parmanand Singh reveals a number of discrepancies in the report for it to be considered seriously. It uses the caste standing as the exclusive test for classifying OBCs. It ignores the judicial insistence on the comparability of OBCs with BCs. The decision of the commission to designate seventy-five percent of Indians as backward is far more than the acceptable fifty percent allowed by the legal doctrines. What’s more, the commission did not present any data to show that OBCs low ritual standing acted as a source for restricted opportunities and social disabilities for the lower castes in modern India. In addition to this, the commission wanted the reservation for OBCs to be in proportion to their population (Singh). Given such discrepancies, it was never going to be easy for any government to pass the commission report. In the wake of the Gujarat riots that happened during the one-hundred-and-two-days-long violent agitation, the government was forced to review the recommendation, the then Prime Minister of India, Mr. V.P. Singh was compelled to appoint a cabinet sub-committee to review the commission’s recommendations on Other Backward Classes (OBCs). The violence was against the increased medical reservations for OBCs. The commission’s recommendation comes after they believed that the caste of a person sums up his or her social and economic position (Singh). The Mandal commission does not deserve the prominence it generated through its report for the simple reason that the report is divisive in nature. The implementation of the commission’s recommendation would have only plunged India into further division based on casteism. I find Mr. Singh’s views most appropriate, and vouch that the implementation of the commission recommendations will only perpetuate stratification of India.
In contrast, Vidushak’s Implementing Mandal: Backward, found in The Times of India, dated October 4, 1990, has him interviewing the then chief minister of Gujarat, Mr. Chimanbhai Patel. Mr. Patel’s observations are quite out-of-the-ordinary. He is for the Mandal commission but against its implementation. His argument is that Mandal’s name should become synonymous with that of Mahatma Gandhi, Jayaprakash Narayan, and Dr. Ambedkar. He says that in not implementing the commission’s recommendation, it wouldn’t make any difference to the people of the country, because, whatever Gandhiji preached, has never been followed by Indians. For example, he says, Gandhi preached non-violence, but Indians are known to have the worst communal violence. Without thinking of implementing the Mandal commission report, what the government needs to do is celebrate Mandal’s birthday as a national holiday, name prominent streets across the country with his name, name airports, airlines, military hardware and sorts after his name, and erect statues of his in every city and town across India. For Indians, he says, the popularity of the person is more satisfying than following his teachings or vision. This interview, though sounds frivolous, has some valid points that suggests that the report shouldn’t be taken too seriously, and that all that is needed to pacify the growing public outcry is to give the person a share of his place in Indian History.
In reviewing the two articles, it can be said that the Mandal report was never popular among the political bureaucracy, and that the only reason why it was opened to public scrutiny was because of the unethical reservations made in medical admissions. The implementation of the Mandal commission would have further divided the country on casteism, and would have led to bloodshed. In putting it in cold-storage, the issue is no longer being debated in public any more.
Works Cited
Singh, Parmanand. 'Mandal Report Will Only Perpetuate Stratification'. The Times of India 1990: 11. Print.
The Times of India. 'Implementing Mandal'. The Times of India 1990: 24. Print.
