Data is a bitch, lotsa OBCs are rich

Selective amnesia (no violence by OBCs in the pro-quota protests), denial (demand for data is new, no one demanded data before, data is inaccurate, data is sufficient), pretense of extreme naivete (not a vote bank measure), absurd demands (asking individuals to conduct census) conspiracy theories (upper caste judges are biased) and sometimes outright lies and fabrication (exhibit 1, exhibit 2, exhibit 3, exhibit 4 , exhibit 5 - more to follow) - this is the stance the socialists have adopted after the recent stay on their latest ponzi scheme.

As usual an army of experts have descended like vultures to defend the Government's legal position. Psephologist (had to look it up) Yogendra Yadav has his own ideas about how the OBC count should be conducted. Legal expert V. Venkatesan has his own interpretation of the law and verdict, which needless to say contradicts the SC stand.

Indra Sawhney case can not be a legal precedent because,

1. it is about Government jobs, not about admissions to schools
2. simply because it was filed when the 93rd amendment wasn't in place
3. a specific ruling does not automatically preclude all future legal challenges related to the issue

Our constitution is huge. It is growing bigger and bigger. Perhaps someday it will approach the size of the Indian Act. Clearly we are moving away from the accepted norm of a democratic country. The constitution is supposed to provide fundamental principles. The law provides the details. Then comes the executive part, typically a commission and other bodies who implement the law.

You can legally challenge:

1. what is put into the constitution if it is vague, ambiguous, contradictory and/or if it is against the spirit of the fundamental principles
   
2. what is made into laws, if it is vague, ambiguous, incomplete, contradictory and/or if it is not in accordance to the constitution
3. the implementation if it is vague, ambiguous, incomplete, contradictory and/or if it is not in accordance to the constitution and/or if it is not according to the law
   

The Constitution. Consider the 93rd amendment itself:

2. Amendment of article 15.-In article 15 of the Constitution, after clause (4), the following clause shall be inserted, namely:

(5) Nothing in this article or in sub-clause (g) of clause (1) of article 19 shall prevent the State from making any special provision, by law, for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes in so far as such special provisions relate to their admission to educational institutions including private educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the State, other than the minority educational institutions referred to in clause (1) of article 30.

As you can see, this scam needed amending one article in the fundamentals section and over-riding two more. Note how many special provisions there are - centrally aided, minority etc. Stretching it a bit thin, aren't we? Note the phrase: socially and educationally backward classes. Doesn't say castes. This is obviously intended to appease Muslims and Christians depending on which assembly election is coming up next. Private institutes are not exempt, minority institutes are.

The Law: Now, the Act itself, namely the The Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) act, 2006:

3. Reservation of seats in Central Educational Institutions. - The reservation of seats in admission and its extent in a Central Educational Institution shall be provided in the following manner, namely:
[...]
(iii) out of the annual permitted strength in each branch of study or faculty, twenty-seven per cent. seats shall be reserved for the Other Backward Classes.

Note how the socially and educationally backward classes became other backward classes. Now, it would be naive to pretend that such a huge exercise involving a huge legislative body and so many legal experts didn't know what they were doing. They knew exactly what they were doing and that there would be challenges. Also check out the exclusions section. Already there are violent demands to repeal this section.

The Implementation - The National Commission of Backward Classes, some examples:

[...]
(e) Castes and communities, which in terms of caste system, are identified with traditional crafts or traditional or hereditary occupations considered to be lowly or undignified.
[...]
3. Castes and communities, of which the proportion of graduates is at least 20% less than the State or district average.

Note that finally, socially and educationally backward classes becomes Castes and communities. Also note how vague some of the definitions are. Lowly and dignified according to who? See how cleverly the backwardedness criterion is restricted to the state/district level. It is a very clear appeasement of Tamil Nadu politicians. Unfortunately for them, latest data clearly disqualifies either the whole group or at least many of the castes from OBC status.

Technical perhaps, but here is an example. Dr. Ramadoss claimed that the creamy layer should not be excluded because it is not in the constitution. Unfortunately, if you accept the NCBC changing the SEBC to Castes and communities, you have to accept the creamy layer, because it is part of NCBC implementation. Also, the NCBC was set up in 1993 with provisions for examination every 10 years.

The only way some of the technicalities could be trumped is by giving the OBCs the historically oppressed status. The constitution does not yet do so.

There is no way this thing can pass muster in a reasonable legal system and functioning democracy.

You can muscle it in or stall admissions for everyone, but then again do not pretend to be all hoity toity holy upholders of justice. Justice has nothing to do with it. As is well known, the beneficiaries would be dudes like this. Hardly deprived in any sense.

But then again, the whole thing was designed to benefit dudes like that.