Lies are spreading on Instagram

Rohith Kumar

What kind of foolish trend is being circulated by so-called meritorious folks? Let’s debunk their folly arguments:

1. Reservation in public jobs and educational institutions was never a temporary provision, and it was not a time-bound provision; read Articles 15 and 16. Only political reservation, i.e., the reservations in the seat sharing in Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies, was a time-bound provision; read Article 334.

2. The primary question is: does the Supreme Court have the power to review the Constitution itself? No, only the Parliament has that power, but the Supreme Court has tried to amend Articles 341(2) and 342(2) by stating that state governments would also have the power to make changes in the lists of SCs and STs, whereas the Constitution says that only the Parliament shall have this power.

3. The reservation of SCs and STs is not a poverty eradication scheme, but reservation is a means to get a share in the policymaking bodies so that policies should have a supportive view toward depressed sections.

4. I can give hundreds of examples where SC/ST people are facing discrimination despite having good jobs and income.

5. I can give tens of examples where a girl of general or so-called upper caste was killed (honor killing) by her own family members because she chose to marry an SC or ST person, albeit the man had a good government job or a job with good income. Now tell me, does having a good income guarantee that the person has been rid of caste-based discrimination?

6. SC/ST are a collection of people who faced caste-based untouchability and face caste-based discrimination regardless of their economic conditions, whereas the definition of OBC is socially and educationally backward classes. OBCs didn’t face caste-based discrimination; on the contrary, some castes among them were powerful, dominating, and economically stronger. Therefore, how can the formula of the creamy layer apply to SC/ST, which was made for the OBC class?