The Supreme Court’s Sept.5, 1995 judgment quashing the Bihar and UP legistations. which helped to build up Backward Caste leadership, and its unanimous welcome by the entire “national” toilet papers indicating the upper caste happiness over it once again pin-points the serious dilemma facing the weakling Backward Caste (BC) movement in the country.
BCs are neither shudras nor Hindus. They too are the original inhabitants of India and hence Untouchables. But the Aryan upper castes/ Hindus have been playing BCs against Dalits (Untouchables) and vice versa and through this divide and rule game they have been keeping both of them enslaved. But the Dalits, because of the fact that they have a leader (Dr. Babasaheb.
Ambedkar) and a philosophy, built a powerful movement challenging the Hindus. And conscious sections of Dalits at least have the courage to say they are not Hindus.
Promotion of Krishna as god: But that is not the case with the BCs whose revolt against brahminism was sabotaged by the latter by promoting a Hindi belt BC (Yadava) leader. Krishna (meaning Black), as a god.
This Black Yadava’s promotion to godhood was the beginning of the fall of the powerful Yadava tribe in the Aryavarta (Hindi heart- land or cow belt). And it took many centuries for the Yadavas to finally assert their strength and throw up two powerful Yadava leaders Chief Minister Laloo Prasad Yadav in Bihar and Mulayam Singh Yadav, the ex-CM of UP.
The latest Supreme Court order which re-intro- duces the hated “economic criterion” in the guise of “creamy layer theory” is nothing but part of the desperate brahminical bid to destroy this Yadava leadership which is challenging the brahminic rulers in this very heartland (DV Edit Dec. 16, 1992: “Economic criterion re-introduced in the guise of creamy layer”).
In the above-referred Editorial we had condemned the 1992 full bench judgment as “a blow to the BC movement which is part of the Dalit movement”. The judgment tried to “exclude the economically advanced members of a particular caste by introducing economic criterion through the backdoor”.
Definition of BC: Article 15(4) of the Constitution clearly defines the BCs as those who are “socially and educationally backward”. Now here the Constitution refers to the “economic criterion” or directs exclusion of the “creamy layer”. From where did the Supreme Court get this brainwave to introduce a new philosophy? The Constitution defines the BCs and directs reservation to the whole “Backward Classes of citizens” and not a part of it even if it is poor. The Supreme Court by directing the State Govts, to exclude the “affluent sections” among BCs has only helped the Aryan upper castes who have been trying to destroy the BC leadership by dividing the BCs into “rich” and “poor”.
Poor among vaidiks: Is there no “creamy layer” among the vaidiks? The Chanakya, Hindu nazi leader A.B. Vajpayee and marxist leader EMS Namboodiripad are such examples of the “cream”. Though they are the cream, they are always worried about the fate of “poor Brahmins” in their community. Just because they form the cream, they don’t get isolated from their jati. How can the Supreme Court say that the “cream” among the BCs cease to be BCs? Social and cultural trait of a person in “Hindu India” is derived from his or her jati. That is why the founding-fathers of the Constitution recommended reservation to all members of a particular jati which is identified as “socially and educationally backward”. But the Supreme Court by trying to divide a jati into “rich” and “poor” is introducing an altogether new philosophy which cannot be accepted by the people of India.
Corrupt & co-opt: The Supreme Court if it has made a proper study of the Hindu social structure and how the Brahminical Social Order (BSO) operates would have noticed that the BSO does not act upon a single Individual. BSO enslaves a whole jati through its famous technic of corruption and co-option. It has no objection to any particular member of a jati becoming rich by corrupt means. In fact it loves such a corrupt person and co-opts him.
The non-Aryan Krishna, who was promoted as a Hindu god. offers the best example to prove this point. The vaidik Brahmins resorted to this desperate step to corrupt and co-opt Krishna as a sex god with 16,108 wives and concubines “to regain their position in society after Buddhism had deflated their ancient prestige”, says D.D. Kosambi. (Culture & Civilisation of Ancient India. 1981 p.93 Vikas).
While the entire tribe of Yadavas was enslaved and crushed, the BSO promoted one single notorious Yadava to godhood and thereby en-slaved the Yadava tribe.
Yadava leadership: Today, Laloo Prasad Yadav and Mulayam Singh Yadav have become formidable foes of the BSO in their very Aryavarta. The Supreme Court judgment amounts to breaking the backbone of the Yadava leadership which is effectively challenging the BSO.
The Supreme Court judgment wants to exclude the “creamy layer”. If this section is removed who is going to fight for the human rights of its jati? The V.P. Singh Govt. order on Mandal Commission Report pertains to reservations only in employment but not in education. The court Judgment, therefore, is restricted to job reservation only.
Mischief of “cream theory”: Only those who are educated and having the requisite qualifications can apply to a reserved post. The uneducated among BCs cannot apply. If the “creamy layer” of a particular jati is excluded, the “affluent”, “advanced” BCs, who alone have produced the educated BCs and have the qualification to apply to these reserved posts, cannot apply. If the “advanced BCs” can’t apply and if the “back- ward BCs are not educated and hence have not produced the qualified candidates for the re- served posts, it means the posts will remain vacant and the upper castes can simply swallow it under the “merit pool”. The Supreme Court “creamy layer” theory has only helped the Aryan upper castes.
This is exactly what the upper castes want this is exactly what the Supreme Court has given. And that is why the entire “national” toilet papers are dancing with joy.
This leads us to another point. The court order repeatedly refers to the “law laid down by the court”. The Constitution under Article 124 has created the Supreme Court as the “final interpreter and guardian of the Constitution”. But the Constitution did not say that Supreme Court can make the law also. Law-making is the prerogative of Parliament and state legislatures. How can the judiciary usurp the functions of the legislature?
Court is not law-maker: A SC verdict may have the power of law but can the SC make the law? It is true that Article 141 says that while interpreting the Constitution, the Supreme Court is making the law. But this is nothing but a judicial interpretation of the law. It will not have the sanction of people whose elected representatives constitute the legislature which alone is the competent law-making authority. Supreme Court Judges are not elected representatives and hence cannot speak for the people of India.
Be that as it may, the SC judgment on “creamy layer” must be resisted by the people who are the ultimate sovereign.
Role for Dalits: Dalits cannot sit silent thinking that the “creamy layer” verdict will not apply to them. The upper castes want to first break the BC movement, which is already weak, and then come to SC/STs who are a tough nut to crack. Dalits and Muslims must fully support the Back- ward Castes and mount a united opposition and force the govt. to undo the damage done by the court. As the elections are fast approaching, this is the right time for the people to asset their sovereignty.
