Skip to main content

When Sardar Patel opposed reservation, asked Scheduled Castes to give up their “inferiority” complex

Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel
By Dr Hari Desai*
It is ironical indeed. Though Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was opposed to any kind of reservation in the government jobs and education as well as in the legislatures (like Mahatma Gandhi), even today his name is being drawn in controversies in the present-day agitations demanding reservation in India.
No doubt, Patel was very keen on giving due share to all the minorities in administration of free India. However, as a Constitution maker, he is hardly being discussed. While drafting the Constitution of India, his contribution as chairman of the Advisory Committee on Minority Rights in extending political safeguards was quite significant. He was assisted by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Dr Rajendra Prasad, KM Munshi and Dr BR Ambedkar as members on the Advisory Committee.
The Constitution provides safeguards, such as reservations for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) in the government jobs and education, as well as political reservations in Parliament and other Legislatures. In late 1990s, reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) on the basis of the Mandal Commission recommendations was also implemented.
The concept of minorities and usage of the phrase Scheduled Castes has created considerable confusion in international treaties and law.
Munshi’s view in the Constituent Assembly in this respect was: “The ‘minorities’ so far as international treaties and international law is concerned, is only restricted to racial, linguistic and religious minorities. The Harijans, generally known as Scheduled Castes, are neither a racial minority nor a linguistic minority, not certainly a religious minority...”
He added, “To clarify the position that so far as the Scheduled Castes are concerned, they are not minorities in the strict meaning of the term; that the Harijans are part and parcel of Hindu community, and safeguards are given to them to protect their rights only till they are completely absorbed in the Hindu community.”
Since “untouchables” were deprived of equal status with caste Hindus for centuries, the provisions were proposed for the initial period so that they can be brought in the mainstream. Unfortunately, the reservation criterion has not only become permanent; even the caste Hindus like Brahmins and Rajputs have been agitating for getting included in the backward reserved categories to get the job and educational benefits!
Worse, all the political parties without any exception favour not only continuation of reservation but demand extending it for other castes and classes in order to garner votes.
Not only Sardar Patel, even Pandit Nehru never dreamed of such a scenario. Both of them were not in favour of reservation for eternity. At one stage, the Sardar and Munshi tried to convince Dr Ambedkar, who was law minister in Nehru’s Cabinet, and was given responsibility to chair the Drafting Committee of the Constitution, to give up his insistence on reservation.
Barrister Ambedkar, who was born in the Mahar community of “untouchables”, refused to budge. He even offered to resign not only his seat in the Constituent Assembly but also as law minister. Nehru and Patel could not afford a giant like Dr Ambedkar to resign, hence they never raised the issue again.
Patel visualized the so-called untouchables as difficult to distinguish. He said during Constituent Assembly debates: “There is no Scheduled Caste between us.”
While referring to an SC member HJ Khandekar, he added: “So those representatives of the Scheduled Castes must know that the Scheduled Caste has to be effaced altogether from our society, and if it is to be effaced, those who have ceased to be untouchables and sit amongst us have to forget that they are untouchables, or else if they carry this inferiority complex, they will not be able to serve their community.”
Patel continued: “They will only be able to serve their community by feeling now that they are with us. They are no more Scheduled Castes and therefore they must change their manners and I appeal to them also to have no breach between them and the other group of Scheduled Castes. There are groups amongst themselves, but everyone tries according to his own light. We are now to begin again. So let us forget these sections and cross-sections and let us stand as one, and together.”
Patel did not preach for the sake of preaching. He even followed what he believed. In Wadhwan, in the convention for the removal of untouchability, Patel joined Scheduled Caste delegates who were sitting separately in the Pandal.
Sardar Patel managed to convince the Muslims, Christians and Parsis to give up the claim for any kind of reservation for their community. When the Constituent Assembly was debating reservations, Dr HC Mookherjee (a Christian member and vice-president of the Assembly), Maulana Hasrat Mohani, Tajamul Husain (Muslim members), RK Sidhva (a Parsi member) and a thumping majority of the members wholeheartedly supported in favour of non-religious reservation, even when some members were insisting on reservation.
While Congress leader Maulana Abul Kalam Azad preferred to remain neutral, Nehru expressed his opinion in favour of the Sardar: “Frankly, I would like this proposal to go further and put an end to such reservations as there still remain. But again, speaking frankly, I realize that in the present state of affairs in India that would not be desirable thing to do, that is to say, in regard to the Scheduled Castes.”
Nehru added, “I try to look upon the problem not in the sense of a religious minority, but rather in the sense of helping backward groups in the country. I do not look at it from the religious point of view or the caste point of view, but from the point of view that a backward group ought to be helped and I am glad that this reservation also will be limited to ten years.” He was referring to the issue of political reservation on May 26,1949 in the Constituent Assembly.
Dr S Radhakrishnan, who was to become India’s first President, expressed solidarity with Sardar Patel’s proposal for political reservation for a limited period in a poetic language: “With a view to develop a homogeneous, secular, democratic state, the devices hitherto employed to keep minorities as separate entities within the state be dropped and loyalty to a single National State developed.”
Radhakrishnan too considered a period of a decade enough for the reservation. Unfortunately, even today no party except the party, the Republic Party of India (RPI - Bahujan Mahasangh), headed by Advocate Prakash Ambedkar, grandson of Dr Ambedkar, favours scrapping of political reservations in Indian legislatures.
---
*Senior journalist and socio-political historian. Contact: haridesai@gmail.com. A version of this article was first published in the Asian Voice

Comments

TRENDING

Quit India Movement 'betrayal' and dubious role of Hindu Mahasabha, RSS leaders

By Shamsul Islam*
After the recent guillotine of Article 370, Hindutva ideologue Ram Madhav, while celebrating the occasion stated that it was honouring of the sacrifices of Dr Shyam Prasad Mukherjee and thousands others who laid down their lives for its removal. It is to be noted that Dr Mukherjee was a cadre of RSS and was groomed into a Hindutva leader by another Hindutva icon, VD Savarkar.

Impact of state repression? Kashmir's 65% people prefer independence: Cambridge study

By Rajiv Shah 
Even as the Government of India’s controversial move to abrogate Article 370 of the Constitution and bifurcate Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) into two union territories is not only refusing to down die but has acquired international dimensions, a recent study, published by the Cambridge University Press, has claimed “pro-independence attitudes” among that 65% of Kashmiris, warning, this sentiment worsens when the state machinery resorts “repressive violence”.

Congress' anti-democratic laws led to Modi govt's 'Constitutional' changes: Scholars

Counterview Desk
A large number of academics* said to be belonging to several Indian and international institutions, even as taking strong exception to the Narendra Modi government's alleged move to amend the Constitution through "illegitimate" means, have taken strong exception to their colleagues in academia who we have become "all too accustomed to adopting a calculated silence in the face of such indignities."

Kashmir normal? Schoolboys, teenagers being arbitrarily picked up, detained: Report

Counterview Desk
A four-person team, consisting of Jean Drèze, well-known development economist; Kavita Krishnan, who is with the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist); Maimoona Mollah of the All India Democratic Women's Association (AIDWA); and Vimal Bhai of the National Alliance of People's Movements (NAPM), back from a five-day fact-finding mission (August 9-13) from Kashmir, has said that people they spoke to “expressed their pain, anger, and sense of betrayal against the Government of India.”
In a report, “Kashmir Caged”, released along with a short eight-minute film, they said, the abrogation of Articles 370 and 35A, dissolution of the state of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), and bifurcating it into two Union Territories, is not being supported by anyone they met, except for BJP spokesperson on Kashmir affairs Ashwani Kumar Chrungoo, who claimed 46% vote share in J&K.
Excerpts from the report: When our flight landed, and the airlines staff announced that passeng…

Skewed sex ratio 'behind' ban on rural Thakor girls' mobile use, inter-caste marriage

By Jharna Pathak*
On July 14, 2019, the Thakor community of 12 villages of Banaskantha district in Gujarat announced a ban on the use of mobile phones by unmarried women. Simultaneously, they imposed penalties on inter-caste marriages. The family of any girl of the community marrying without the consent of her parents would now be fined Rs 1.5 lakh while that of a boy marrying a girl from other community without his family’s consent would be penalised with a fine of Rs 2 lakh.

Were JVCs, rock cutters 'reinforcing' Statue of Unity base on dry Narmada riverbed?

By Kevin Antao* 
Having seen photographs and write-ups on the world’s tallest Statue of Unity, constructed and assembled off Narmada dam in South Gujarat, I always wanted to visit the site and see for myself the great marvel that it was being made out to be.

Sardar Patel's 'notable' achievement on J&K: Insertion of Article 370 in Constitution

By Shamsul Islam*
One of the "truths" manufactured in the boudhik shibirs (ideological training camps) of the RSS is that it was Jawaharlal Nehru who forced Article 370 on India while Sardar Patel, the first home minister of India, was opposed to it. The RSS leaders both inside the Modi government and outside ceaselessly keep on blaming Jawaharlal Nehru as the sole architect of Article 370, giving Kashmir special status.

Kashmir kayoed, bhakts 'jubilant': Much like crowds when Hitler purged Jews, Catholics

By Fr Cedric Prakash sj*
August 12, 2019 was the great festival of Eid al-Adha (incidentally, for Jews, Christians and Muslims – the sacrifice of Abraham is a very significant one); for the people of Kashmir however, this year Eid was a sad day indeed, what with the lockdown and communications blockade!

Dholera 'inundated': Gujarat govt promotes low lying area as top smart city site

Counterview Desk
Even as the Dholera Special Investment Region Regional Development Authority (DSIRDA) of the Gujarat government was busy organising a junket for Gujarat-based journalists for the area sought to be sold as an ideal special investment region (SIR) for industrialists, well-known farmers' activist Sagar Rabari has wondered why no investor has so far agreed to put in money in an area situated in Ahmedabad district along the Gulf of Khambhat.

J&K curbs 'violate' International Covenant on civil, political rights: Letter to Modi

Counterview Desk
The International Federation for Human Rights (IFDH), a Paris-based human rights NGO with global presence, has sent an open letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, saying the decision to “reconfigurate” Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), remove its special status and impose a “complete lock-down of the region” violates Kashmiris’ “fundamental right to self-determination and their right to participate in crucial decisions that affect their lives.”