@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{Short description|Form of affirmative action}}
-{{Distinguish|Indian Reservation|text=[[Indian reservation]]s of [[Native Americans in the United States|Native Americans]] (dubbed "Indians") in the United States}}
+{{Distinguish|Indian reservation|Indian reserve|text=[[Indian reservation]]s of Native Americans (dubbed "Indians") in the United States or [[Indian reserve]]s of First Nations (dubbed "Indians") in Canada; For other topics, see [[Indian reserve (disambiguation)]].}}
 {{Use Indian English|date=January 2019}}
 {{Use dmy dates|date=September 2016}}
-'''Reservation''' is a system  in India that provides scholarship, concession in fees, 49.5 % seats in educational institutions, jobs, and relaxation in qualifying exams, relaxation in age to certain castes. This system continues almost 70 years of independence. The motive of reservation was representation in education, employment and politics. Based on provisions in the Indian [[Constitution of India|Constitution]], it allows the [[Government of India|Union Government]] and also the [[States and Territories of India]] to set ''reserved quotas or seats'', which lower the qualifications needed in exams, job openings etc. for "socially and educationally backward citizens."<ref>{{Cite web|title=Reservation Is About Adequate Representation, Not Poverty Eradication|url=https://thewire.in/law/supreme-court-bench-reservation|access-date=2020-12-19|website=The Wire}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|last=Rajagopal|first=Krishnadas|date=2020-06-11|title=Right to reservation is not a fundamental right, observes SC judge as parties withdraw plea for quota|language=en-IN|work=The Hindu|url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/right-to-reservation-is-not-fundamental-right-observes-judge-as-tn-parties-withdraw-plea-for-obc-quota-in-medical-courses/article31807732.ece|access-date=2020-12-19|issn=0971-751X}}</ref>
+'''Reservation''' is a system of [[affirmative action]] in [[India]] that provides historically disadvantaged groups representation in education, employment and politics. Based on provisions in the [[Constitution of India|Indian Constitution]], it allows the [[Government of India|Union Government]] and also the [[States and Territories of India]] to set ''reserved quotas or seats'', which lower the qualifications needed in exams, job openings etc. for "socially and educationally backward citizens."<ref>{{Cite web|title=Reservation Is About Adequate Representation, Not Poverty Eradication|url=https://thewire.in/law/supreme-court-bench-reservation|access-date=2020-12-19|website=The Wire}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|last=Rajagopal|first=Krishnadas|date=2020-06-11|title=Right to reservation is not a fundamental right, observes SC judge as parties withdraw plea for quota|language=en-IN|work=The Hindu|url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/right-to-reservation-is-not-fundamental-right-observes-judge-as-tn-parties-withdraw-plea-for-obc-quota-in-medical-courses/article31807732.ece|access-date=2020-12-19|issn=0971-751X}}</ref>
 == Terms ==
 {{Unreferenced Section|date=April 2020}}
-Reservation is primarily given to all 3 groups: [[Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes|Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes]], [[Other Backward Class]]es abbreviated as SC, ST, OBC respectively. Originally reservation was only given to SCs and STs but was later extended to OBCs in 1987 after the implementation of the [[Mandal Commission]] report.
+Reservation is primarily given to all 4 groups: [[Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes|Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes]], [[Other Backward Class]]es, [[Economically Weaker Section]], abbreviated as SC, ST, OBC, EWS respectively. Originally only SC and ST communities were eligible for reservation. In 1987, it was extended to include OBCs after the implementation of the [[Mandal Commission]] report. In 2019, reservation was extended for Economically Weaker Section within the General Category.
 * The first are the [[Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes|Scheduled Castes]]. These communities were variously seen as at the bottom or "underneath" the [[Caste system in India|caste system]] in South Asia, below even the ''[[shudra]]'' varna. These castes had hereditary professions such as agricultural labourers, manual scavenging, tannery, washing clothes, daily wage workers, fishing and more. They were subjected to the practice of [[untouchability]], which takes the form of various social restrictions ranging from inability to touch other castes to inability to use the same water source or even live in the same area. Today many of these castes are landless labourers.
 * The next group are the [[Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes|Scheduled Tribes]]. The definition of this group varies, but the criteria for a Scheduled Tribe "indications of primitive traits, distinctive culture, geographical isolation, shyness of contact with the community at large, and backwardness." Most of these groups are considered [[Adivasi]]s, and the original inhabitants while others are nomadic tribes who were notified as "criminal tribes" under British rule. They range in modes of existence from subsistence agriculturalists who have had interaction between the outside world to hunter-gatherer groups still in the jungles. Many of them frequently had their lands [[Exploitation of labour|exploited]] by the British during the [[Colonial India|colonial era]]. However, in the Northeast, many of the tribes are relatively better-off and possess interaction with the outside world. Examples include the [[Boro people|Bodo]], [[Gondi people|Gond]], [[Banjara]], and [[Santal people|Santal]].
+* The third main group are the [[Other Backward Class]]es. They were not originally in the reservation scheme, but during the [[premiership of Morarji Desai]], the [[Mandal Commission]] studied all the communities in India to find what castes were "backward" compared to the general population. Based on [[Census of India prior to independence|1931 census data]], they estimated 52% of India's population belonged to castes that were "backward" due to various socio-economic factors like wealth or traditional occupation. The possibility for providing reservation to these people was allowed for in Article 15(4) and Article 16(4), which states the government can provide reservation to "backward classes." Although the center maintains its own list of OBC's, comprising over 5,000 castes and subcastes, each state can create their own backward caste list for in-state reservations. Most OBCs were classified originally in the ''[[shudra]]'' varna and have low ritual status, apart from being economically deprived. However, there are other castes in the OBC list who, although ritually low, are considered "dominant castes" for numerical strength and in many cases are the enforcers of the caste hierarchy, including some Brahmin groups.
-* The third main group are the [[Other Backward Class]]es. They were not originally in the reservation scheme, but during the [[Premiership of Morarji Desai|premiership of Morarji Desai]], the [[Mandal Commission]] studied all the communities in India to find what castes were "backward" compared to the general population. Based on [[Census of India prior to independence|1931 census data]], they estimated 52% of India's population belonged to castes that were "backward" due to various socio-economic factors like wealth or traditional occupation. The possibility for providing reservation to these people was allowed for in Article 15(4) and Article 16(4), which states the government can provide reservation to "backward classes." Although the center maintains its own list of OBC's, comprising over 5,000 castes and subcastes, each state can create their own backward caste list for in-state reservations. Most OBCs were classified originally in the ''[[shudra]]'' varna and have low ritual status, apart from being economically deprived. However, there are other castes in the OBC list who, although ritually low, are considered "dominant castes" for numerical strength and in many cases are the enforcers of the caste hierarchy, including some Brahmin groups.
 In some states like Bihar or Tamil Nadu, there is a divide between backward castes, who face some socio-economic disadvantage and most backward or extremely backward castes, who face a high amount of social discrimination barely above Dalits in their status. In fact, unlike Scheduled Castes, OBCs do not have to be Hindu and many states give benefits to some Muslim and Christian communities. This list is most subject to change since the criteria are not as stringent, making it a list often added by politicians to please certain sections of their voters.
@@ Line 27: / Line 25: @@
 ===After independence===
-After the independence of India in 1947 there were some major initiatives in favor of the STs, SCs and after the 1980s in favour of OBCs.(Other Backward Castes) and in 2019 for poor in the general category. The country's affirmative action program was launched in 1950 and is the oldest such programme in the world.<ref>{{cite web|title=Human Development Report 2016|url=http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2016_human_development_report.pdf|website=UNDP|access-date=21 March 2017|page=119}}</ref>
+After the independence of India in 1947 there were some major initiatives in favor of the STs, SCs and after the 1980s in favour of OBCs (Other Backward Castes) and in 2019 for poor in the general category. The country's affirmative action program was launched in 1950 and is the oldest such programme in the world.<ref>{{cite web|title=Human Development Report 2016|url=http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2016_human_development_report.pdf|website=UNDP|access-date=21 March 2017|page=119}}</ref>
 A common form of caste discrimination in India was the practice of untouchability. SCs were the primary targets of the practice, which was outlawed by the new Constitution of India.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Untouchability in the Far East |jstor=2382914 |first=Herbert |last=Passin |journal=Monumenta Nipponica |volume=11 |issue=3 |date=October 1955 |pages=247–267|doi=10.2307/2382914 }}</ref>
@@ Line 33: / Line 31: @@
 In 1954, the Ministry of Education suggested that 20 percent of places should be reserved for the SCs and STs in educational institutions with a provision to relax minimum qualifying marks for admission by 5 percent wherever required. In 1982, it was specified that 15 percent and 7.5 percent of vacancies in [[public sector]] and government-aided educational institutes should be reserved for the SC and ST candidates, respectively.<ref>{{cite web|title=Educational Safeguards|url=http://www.education.nic.in/cd50years/g/S/I6/0SI60301.htm|work=Department of Education|archive-date=19 June 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090619063917/http://www.education.nic.in/cd50years/g/S/I6/0SI60301.htm|publisher=Government of India|access-date=2011-11-27}}</ref>
-A significant change began in 1979 when the [[Mandal Commission]] or the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Commission was established to assess the situation of the socially and educationally backward classes.<ref name="Bhattacharya">{{Cite news|url=http://www.theotherindia.org/caste/who-are-the-obcs.html|title=Who are the OBCs?|access-date=2006-04-19 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060627065912/http://www.theotherindia.org/caste/who-are-the-obcs.html |archive-date=27 June 2006 |last=Bhattacharya |first=Amit |work=The Times of India |date=8 April 2006}}</ref> The commission did not have exact population figures for the OBCs and so used data from the [[Census of India prior to independence|1931 census]], thus estimating the group's population at 52 per cent.<ref name=Ramaiah>{{Cite web |last=Ramaiah |first=A. |date=6 June 1992 |url=http://www.tiss.edu/downloads/ppapers/pp1.pdf |title=Identifying Other Backward Classes |pages=1203–1207 |publisher=Economic and Political Weekly |access-date=2006-05-27 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051230030051/http://www.tiss.edu/downloads/ppapers/pp1.pdf |archive-date=30 December 2005}}</ref> In 1980 the commission's report recommended that a reserved quota for OBCs of 27 per cent should apply in respect of services and public sector bodies operated by the Union Government. It called for a similar change to admissions to institutes of higher education, except where states already had more generous requirements.<ref name="Bhattacharya" /> It was not until the 1990s that the recommendations were implemented in Union Government jobs.<ref>{{cite web |title=Implementation of Recommendations of Mandal Commission |url=http://parliamentofindia.nic.in/lsdeb/ls10/ses4/0507089201.htm |publisher=Parliament of India |access-date=2011-11-04}}</ref> In 2019 the government announces the 10% reservation in educational institutions and government jobs for economically weaker section of the general category.
+A significant change began in 1979 when the [[Mandal Commission]] or the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Commission was established to assess the situation of the socially and educationally backward classes.<ref name="Bhattacharya">{{Cite news|url=http://www.theotherindia.org/caste/who-are-the-obcs.html|title=Who are the OBCs?|access-date=2006-04-19 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060627065912/http://www.theotherindia.org/caste/who-are-the-obcs.html |archive-date=27 June 2006 |last=Bhattacharya |first=Amit |work=The Times of India |date=8 April 2006}}</ref> The commission did not have exact population figures for the OBCs and so used data from the [[Census of India prior to independence|1931 census]], thus estimating the group's population at 52 per cent.<ref name=Ramaiah>{{Cite web |last=Ramaiah |first=A. |date=6 June 1992 |url=http://www.tiss.edu/downloads/ppapers/pp1.pdf |title=Identifying Other Backward Classes |pages=1203–1207 |publisher=Economic and Political Weekly |access-date=2006-05-27 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051230030051/http://www.tiss.edu/downloads/ppapers/pp1.pdf |archive-date=30 December 2005}}</ref> In 1980, the commission's report recommended that a reserved quota for OBCs of 27 per cent should apply in respect of services and public sector bodies operated by the Union Government. It called for a similar change to admissions to institutes of higher education, except where states already had more generous requirements.<ref name="Bhattacharya" /> It was not until the 1990s that the recommendations were implemented in Union Government jobs.<ref>{{cite web |title=Implementation of Recommendations of Mandal Commission |url=http://parliamentofindia.nic.in/lsdeb/ls10/ses4/0507089201.htm |publisher=Parliament of India |access-date=2011-11-04}}</ref> In 2019 the government announces the 10% reservation in educational institutions and government jobs for economically weaker section of the general category.
-The Constitution of India states in article 16(4): "Nothing in [article 16] or in clause (2) of article 29 shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any socially, and educationally backward classes of citizens of or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes."<ref>{{cite constitution |article=15|section=4 |country=India |language=en |ratified=1950 }}</ref> Article 46 of the Constitution states that "The State shall promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, and, in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, and shall protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation."<ref>{{cite constitution |article=46 |section=0 |country=India |language=en |ratified=1950 |url=http://lawmin.nic.in/olwing/coi/coi-english/Const.Pock%202Pg.Rom8Fsss(7).pdf|access-date=2013-09-08 }}</ref>
+The Constitution of India states in article 15(4): "Nothing in [article 15] or in clause (2) of article 29 shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any socially, and educationally backward classes of citizens of or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes."<ref>{{cite constitution |article=[[:s:Constitution of India/Part III|15]]|section=4 |country=India |language=en |ratified=1950 }}</ref> Article 46 of the Constitution states that "The State shall promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, and, in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, and shall protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation."<ref>{{cite constitution |article=[[:s:Constitution of India/Part IV|46]] |section=0 |country=India |language=en |ratified=1950 |url=http://lawmin.nic.in/olwing/coi/coi-english/Const.Pock%202Pg.Rom8Fsss(7).pdf|access-date=2013-09-08 }}</ref>
 The [[Supreme Court of India]] ruled in 1992 that reservations could not exceed 50 percent, anything above which it judged would violate equal access as guaranteed by the Constitution. It thus put a cap on reservations.<ref name="sawhney" /> However, the recent amendment of the constitution exceeds 50% and also there are state laws that exceed this 50 percent limit and these are under litigation in the Supreme Court. For example, in the State of [[Tamil Nadu]], the caste-based reservation stands at 69 percent and applies to about 87 percent of the population.
@@ Line 47: / Line 45: @@
 Government and public sector hiring based on Merit in open category and one more anomaly here i.e., Priority in hiring will be given by: Other Minorities women, ST women, SC women, ST Men, SC Men, OBC women, OBC Men, EWC Women, EWC Men and then General if they are equally eligibility (for example having same marks or Rank).
 The landmark initiative of Special Recruitment for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe in Government jobs was started in Kerala in 1972 by Vella Eacharan.
-The 1993 Supreme Court ruling in the [[Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India]] case said that reservations in job promotions are "unconstitutional" or not in accordance with the political constitution but allowed its continuation for five years.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://indianexpress.com/article/explained/bjps-obc-pitch-how-stronger-new-backward-classes-panel-will-function-4617203/|title=BJP's OBC pitch: How stronger new backward classes panel will function|publisher=The Indian Express}}</ref><ref name="sawhney">{{cite web |url=http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/1363234/ |title=Indra Sawhney Etc. vs Union of India And Others, Etc. on 16 November, 1992 |publisher=IndianKanoon.org |quote="(4) Reservation being an extreme form of protective measure or affirmative action it should be confined to minority of seats. Even though the Constitution does not lay down any specific bar but the constitutional philosophy being against proportional equality the principle of balancing equality ordains reservation, of any manner, not to exceed 50%.", "Reservation in promotion is constitutionally impermissible as once the advantaged and disadvantaged are made equal and are brought in one class or group then any further benefit extended for promotion on the inequality existing prior to being brought in the group would be treating equals unequally. It would not be eradicating the effects of past discrimination but perpetuating it." |access-date=2012-08-22}}</ref> In 1995, the [[List of amendments of the Constitution of India|77th amendment]] to the Constitution was made to amend [[s:Constitution of India/Part III#Article 16 .7BEquality of opportunity in matters of public employment. 7D|Article 16]] before the five-year period expired to continue with reservations for SC/STs in promotions.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/amend/amend77.htm |title=Seventy Seventh Amendment |publisher=Indiacode.nic.in |access-date=2011-11-19}}</ref> It was further modified through the 85th amendment to give the benefit of ''consequential seniority'' to SC/ST candidates promoted by reservation.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/amend/amend85.htm |title=Eighty Fifth Amendment |date=4 January 2002 |publisher=Indiacode.nic.in |access-date=2011-11-19}}</ref>
+The 1993 Supreme Court ruling in the [[Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India]] case said that reservations in job promotions are "unconstitutional" or not in accordance with the political constitution but allowed its continuation for five years.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://indianexpress.com/article/explained/bjps-obc-pitch-how-stronger-new-backward-classes-panel-will-function-4617203/|title=BJP's OBC pitch: How stronger new backward classes panel will function|date=18 April 2017|publisher=The Indian Express}}</ref><ref name="sawhney">{{cite web |url=http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/1363234/ |title=Indra Sawhney Etc. vs Union of India And Others, Etc. on 16 November, 1992 |publisher=IndianKanoon.org |quote="(4) Reservation being an extreme form of protective measure or affirmative action it should be confined to minority of seats. Even though the Constitution does not lay down any specific bar but the constitutional philosophy being against proportional equality the principle of balancing equality ordains reservation, of any manner, not to exceed 50%.", "Reservation in promotion is constitutionally impermissible as once the advantaged and disadvantaged are made equal and are brought in one class or group then any further benefit extended for promotion on the inequality existing prior to being brought in the group would be treating equals unequally. It would not be eradicating the effects of past discrimination but perpetuating it." |access-date=2012-08-22}}</ref> In 1995, the [[List of amendments of the Constitution of India|77th amendment]] to the Constitution was made to amend [[s:Constitution of India/Part III#Article 16 .7BEquality of opportunity in matters of public employment. 7D|Article 16]] before the five-year period expired to continue with reservations for SC/STs in promotions.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/amend/amend77.htm |title=Seventy Seventh Amendment |publisher=Indiacode.nic.in |access-date=2011-11-19}}</ref> It was further modified through the 85th amendment to give the benefit of ''consequential seniority'' to SC/ST candidates promoted by reservation.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/amend/amend85.htm |title=Eighty Fifth Amendment |date=4 January 2002 |publisher=Indiacode.nic.in |access-date=2011-11-19}}</ref>
 The 81st amendment was made to the Constitution to permit the government to treat the backlog of reserved vacancies as a separate and distinct group, to which the ceiling of 50 per cent did not apply.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/amend/amend81.htm |title=Eighty First Amendment |date=29 August 1997 |publisher=Indiacode.nic.in |access-date=2011-11-19}}</ref> The 82nd amendment inserted a provision in Article 335 to enable states to give concessions to SC/ST candidates in promotion.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/amend/amend82.htm |title=Eighty Second Amendment |publisher=Indiacode.nic.in |access-date=2011-11-19}}</ref>
@@ Line 71: / Line 69: @@
 !ST
 !OBC
-!EWS and <br />Other reserved
+!EWS
+!Other Reservations
 !Total
 |-
-![[Andhra Pradesh]]
+![[Andhra Pradesh]]<ref>{{Cite news |last=Raghavendra |first=V. |date=2021-07-15 |title=A.P. govt announces 10% reservation for EWS |language=en-IN |work=The Hindu |url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/andhra-pradesh/ap-govt-announces-10-reservation-for-ews/article35337212.ece |access-date=2022-04-16 |issn=0971-751X}}</ref>
 |15
 |6
 |29
 |10
+|
 |60
 |-
@@ Line 85: / Line 85: @@
 |12
 |38
+|
 |
 |50
 |-
-![[Arunachal Pradesh]]
+![[Arunachal Pradesh]]<ref>{{Cite web |title=THE CONSTITUTION (EIGHTY THIRD AMENDMENT) ACT 2000{{!}}Legislative Department {{!}} Ministry of Law and Justice {{!}} GoI |url=https://legislative.gov.in/constitution-eighty-third-amendment-act#:~:text=Arunachal%20Pradesh%20is%20a%20State,any%20law%20to%20that%20effect. |access-date=2022-04-16 |website=legislative.gov.in}}</ref>
 |
 |80
+|
 |
 |
@@ Line 100: / Line 102: @@
 |27
 |10
+|
 |59
 |-
@@ Line 107: / Line 110: @@
 |34
 |10
+|
 |60
 |-
@@ Line 113: / Line 117: @@
 |
 |27
+|
 |
 |27
@@ Line 121: / Line 126: @@
 |14
 |10
+|
 |69
 |-
@@ Line 127: / Line 133: @@
 |9
 |27
+|
 |
 |39
@@ Line 135: / Line 142: @@
 |27
 |10
+|
 |60
 |-
@@ Line 142: / Line 150: @@
 |27
 |10
+|
 |51
 |-
@@ Line 149: / Line 158: @@
 |27
 |10
+|
 |59
 |-
@@ Line 156: / Line 166: @@
 |23
 |10
+|
 |53
 |-
@@ Line 163: / Line 174: @@
 |20
 |10
+|
 |59
 |-
@@ Line 170: / Line 182: @@
 |14
 |10
+|
 |60
 |-
@@ Line 177: / Line 190: @@
 |32
 |10
+|
 |60
 |-
@@ Line 184: / Line 198: @@
 |40
 |10
+|
 |60
 |-
@@ Line 189: / Line 204: @@
 |
 |100
+|
 |
 |
@@ Line 198: / Line 214: @@
 |14
 |10
+|
 |60
 |-
@@ Line 205: / Line 222: @@
 |32
 |10
+|
 |62
 |-
@@ Line 211: / Line 229: @@
 |34
 |17
+|
 |
 |54
@@ Line 217: / Line 236: @@
 |
 |80
+|
 |
 |
@@ Line 224: / Line 244: @@
 |
 |80
+|
 |
 |
@@ Line 231: / Line 252: @@
 |
 |80
+|
 |
 |
@@ Line 240: / Line 262: @@
 |11
 |10
+|
 |59
 |-
@@ Line 246: / Line 269: @@
 |
 |34
+|
 |
 |50
@@ Line 254: / Line 278: @@
 |12
 |10
+|
 |51
 |-
@@ Line 261: / Line 286: @@
 |21
 |10
+|
 |59
 |-
-![[Sikkim]]
+![[Sikkim]]<ref>{{Cite web |title=Department Of Personnel {{!}} State Portal-Sikkim |url=https://sikkim.gov.in/departments/department-of-personnel-public-grievances |access-date=2022-04-16 |website=sikkim.gov.in}}</ref>
 |5
 |21
 |24
 |10
-|60
+|25 (BL = 20 &
+Primitive Tribes = 5)
+|85
 |-
 ![[Tamil Nadu]]
@@ Line 274: / Line 302: @@
 |1
 |50
+|
 |
 |69
@@ Line 282: / Line 311: @@
 |29
 |10
+|
 |60
 |-
@@ Line 289: / Line 319: @@
 |2
 |10
+|
 |60
 |-
@@ Line 296: / Line 327: @@
 |27
 |10
+|
 |60
 |-
@@ Line 303: / Line 335: @@
 |13
 |10
+|
 |44
 |-
@@ Line 310: / Line 343: @@
 |17
 |10
+|
 |55
 |}
@@ Line 324: / Line 358: @@
 In Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh, 32% of posts are reserved for females in all government departments and services, such as police, health, education and general administration.<ref name="Deccan Herald 2014">{{cite web | title=33% reservation for women in all Gujarat state government jobs | website=Deccan Herald | date=13 October 2014 | url=http://www.deccanherald.com/content/435789/33-reservation-women-all-gujarat.html | access-date=2015-09-03}}</ref><ref name="dnax2014">{{cite web | title=Gujarat increases women's reservation to 33% in government jobs | website=dna | date=14 October 2014 | url=http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-gujarat-increases-women-s-reservation-to-33-in-government-jobs-2025919 | access-date=2015-09-03}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Arora|first=N.D.|title=Political Science for Civil Services Main Examination|year=2010|publisher=Tata McGraw-Hill Education|page=19|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=z8Flb0gZ3ZkC&pg=SA5-PA19|isbn=9780070090941}}</ref> From 2015 onwards Kerala has implemented a 55% reservation for all posts of its local self governing bodies.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Local body polls: Women fight on two fronts as parties reluctant to give out general seats|url=https://www.onmanorama.com/kerala/top-news/2020/11/22/kerala-local-body-polls-parties-refuse-to-field-women-in-general-seats.html|access-date=2020-12-30|website=OnManorama}}</ref>
-On 21 July 2021, Karnataka became the first state in the country to provide one percent reservation for the transgender community in all government services. The government submitted a report to the High Court in this regard, informing that a notification had already been issued after amending the Karnataka Civil Service. The job could be given to males or females, from the same category, in case of the non-availability of transgender candidates.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Karnataka Is The First State To Provide 1% Reservation To Transgenders In Govt Services|url=https://www.indiatimes.com/news/india/karnataka-reservation-to-transgenders-in-govt-services-545457.html|access-date=2021-07-21|website=India Times}}</ref>
+On 21 July 2021, Karnataka became the first state in the country to provide one percent reservation for the transgender community in all government services. The government submitted a report to the High Court in this regard, informing that a notification had already been issued after amending the Karnataka Civil Service. The job could be given to males or females, from the same category, in case of the non-availability of transgender candidates.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Karnataka Is The First State To Provide 1% Reservation To Transgenders In Govt Services|url=https://www.indiatimes.com/news/india/karnataka-reservation-to-transgenders-in-govt-services-545457.html|access-date=2021-07-21|website=India Times|date=21 July 2021}}</ref>
 ==Religion==
 The [[Tamil Nadu]] government has allotted 3.5% of seats each to Muslims and Christians, thereby altering the OBC reservation to 23% from 30% (since it excludes persons belonging to Other Backward Castes who are either Muslims or Christians).<ref name=Viswanathan>{{Cite news|last=Viswanathan |first=S. |title=A step forward |newspaper=Frontline |volume=24 |issue=22 |date=16 November 2007 |url=http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/fline/fl2422/stories/20071116502203400.htm |url-status=usurped |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101120195956/http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/fline/fl2422/stories/20071116502203400.htm |archive-date=20 November 2010 }}</ref>
-The Government of Andhra Pradesh introduced a law enabling 4 percent reservations for Muslims in 2004. This law was upheld by the Supreme Court in an interim order in 2010 but it constituted a Constitution bench to look further into the issue.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/andhra-pradesh/interim-relief-to-ap-on-muslim-reservation/article304480.ece|title=Interim relief to AP on Muslim reservation|work=The Hindu|access-date=2015-06-14}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-07-24/india/32827015_1_muslim-sub-quota-central-educational-institutions-constitution-bench|archive-url=https://archive.today/20130629123830/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-07-24/india/32827015_1_muslim-sub-quota-central-educational-institutions-constitution-bench|url-status=dead|archive-date=2013-06-29|work=[[The Times of India]]|title=Supreme Court to hear govt on Muslim quota|access-date=2015-06-14}}</ref> The referral was to examine the constitutional validity of quotas based on religion.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/centre-seeks-scs-approval-on-muslim-reservation/articleshow/30704696.cms?from=mdr|title=Centre Seeks SCs approval on Muslim Reservation|work=timesofindia-economictimes|access-date=2020-03-05}}</ref> [[Kerala Public Service Commission]] has a quota of 12% for Muslims.<ref>{{Cite web|date=7 September 2020|title=Reservation chart by Kerala Public Service Commission|url=https://www.keralapsc.gov.in/index.php/rotation-chart}}</ref> Religious minority (Muslim or Christian) educational institutes also have 50% reservation for Muslim or Christian religions. The Central government has listed a number of Muslim communities as [[List of Muslim Other Backward Classes communities|backward Muslims]], making them eligible for reservation.{{citation needed|date=September 2016}}<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/west-bengal-announces-reservation-for-muslims-in-govt-jobs/articleshow/5548683.cms?from=mdr|title=State Government Provides Reservation to Muslims|last=A|first=Roshan|date=2 February 2010|website=Economic Times|access-date=6 February 2010}}</ref>
+The Government of Andhra Pradesh introduced a law enabling 4 percent reservations for Muslims in 2004. This law was upheld by the Supreme Court in an interim order in 2010 but it constituted a Constitution bench to look further into the issue.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/andhra-pradesh/interim-relief-to-ap-on-muslim-reservation/article304480.ece|title=Interim relief to AP on Muslim reservation|work=The Hindu|date=25 March 2010|access-date=2015-06-14}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-07-24/india/32827015_1_muslim-sub-quota-central-educational-institutions-constitution-bench|archive-url=https://archive.today/20130629123830/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-07-24/india/32827015_1_muslim-sub-quota-central-educational-institutions-constitution-bench|url-status=dead|archive-date=2013-06-29|work=[[The Times of India]]|title=Supreme Court to hear govt on Muslim quota|access-date=2015-06-14}}</ref> The referral was to examine the constitutional validity of quotas based on religion.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/centre-seeks-scs-approval-on-muslim-reservation/articleshow/30704696.cms?from=mdr|title=Centre Seeks SCs approval on Muslim Reservation|work=timesofindia-economictimes|access-date=2020-03-05}}</ref> [[Kerala Public Service Commission]] has a quota of 12% for Muslims.<ref>{{Cite web|date=7 September 2020|title=Reservation chart by Kerala Public Service Commission|url=https://www.keralapsc.gov.in/index.php/rotation-chart}}</ref> Religious minority (Muslim or Christian) educational institutes also have 50% reservation for Muslim or Christian religions. The Central government has listed a number of Muslim communities as [[List of Muslim Other Backward Classes communities|backward Muslims]], making them eligible for reservation.{{citation needed|date=September 2016}}<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/west-bengal-announces-reservation-for-muslims-in-govt-jobs/articleshow/5548683.cms?from=mdr|title=State Government Provides Reservation to Muslims|last=A|first=Roshan|date=2 February 2010|website=Economic Times|access-date=6 February 2010}}</ref>
 ==Criticism, controversies and protests==
@@ Line 345: / Line 379: @@
 === Agitations demanding more reservation ===
-In 2008 and 2010, the [[Gurjar]] community in Rajasthan [[Gurjar agitation in Rajasthan|demanded]] reclassification from OBC to ST for increased reservation benefits. They began violently protesting on the streets of Rajasthan and blocked several rail lines. Police firing on Gurjars began a tit-for-tat cycle of violence between Police and Gurjars. The violence ended with 37 people dead. Their move was opposed by the Meenas, the main ST community in Rajasthan. In 2019, the agitation restarted as Gurjars demanded 5% reservation instead of 1%, and began blocking trains to this effect.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/ten-trains-affected-as-gujjar-quota-agitation-enters-day-3-1452589-2019-02-10|title=10 trains affected as Gujjar quota agitation enters Day 3|date=February 10, 2019|website=India Today|language=en|access-date=2020-03-24}}</ref>
+In 2008 and 2010, the Gujjar community in Rajasthan [[Gurjar agitation in Rajasthan|demanded]] reclassification from OBC to ST ([[Scheduled Tribes]]) for increased reservation benefits. They began violently protesting on the streets of Rajasthan and blocked several rail lines. Police firing on Gujjars began a tit-for-tat cycle of violence between Police and Gujjars. The violence ended with 37 people dead. Their move was opposed by the Meenas, the main ST community in Rajasthan.{{citation needed|date=March 2022}}
+In 2019, the agitation restarted as Gujjars demanded 5% reservation, and began blocking trains to this effect.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/ten-trains-affected-as-gujjar-quota-agitation-enters-day-3-1452589-2019-02-10|title=10 trains affected as Gujjar quota agitation enters Day 3|date=February 10, 2019|website=India Today|language=en|access-date=2020-03-24}}</ref>
-Jats have been demanding OBC status since the 1990s. In 2016, they began an [[Jat reservation agitation|agitation]] to get this status. To this effect they began protesting by blockading roads and lines, but later the protests turned violent. Riots spread to Delhi and western Uttar Pradesh, and even Rajasthan. The epicentre of the violence was in [[Rohtak|Rothak]], and almost ₹34000 crores ($4.8 billion) worth of property was damaged and 30 were killed. Bowing to the pressure, the Haryana government created a special category for Jats and other upper castes called BC, and appointed 10% reservation, but the measure was blocked in court.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|date=2015-06-05|title=Jats, Marathas, and Patels Want Quotas, But Do They Need Them?|url=https://www.epw.in/engage/article/jats-patels-and-marathas-want-quotas-but-do-they-deserve-them|journal=Economic and Political Weekly|language=en|pages=7–8}}</ref>
+[[Jats]] have been demanding OBC status since the 1990s. In 2016, they began an [[Jat reservation agitation|agitation]] to get this status. To this effect they began protesting by blockading roads and lines, but later the protests turned violent. Riots spread to Delhi and western Uttar Pradesh, and even Rajasthan. The epicentre of the violence was in [[Rohtak|Rothak]], and almost ₹34000 crores ($4.8 billion) worth of property was damaged and 30 were killed. Bowing to the pressure, the Haryana government created a special category for Jats and other upper castes called BC, and appointed 10% reservation, but the measure was blocked in court.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|date=2015-06-05|title=Jats, Marathas, and Patels Want Quotas, But Do They Need Them?|url=https://www.epw.in/engage/article/jats-patels-and-marathas-want-quotas-but-do-they-deserve-them|journal=Economic and Political Weekly|language=en|pages=7–8}}</ref>
 Beginning in 2015, the [[Patidar]] community (better known as Patel) began [[Patidar reservation agitation|agitating for OBC status]] in Gujarat. This movement consisted of massive demonstrations across the state, led by Hardik Patel. Later many of these protests turned violent, resulting in curfews across the state and crores worth of damage. Talks with the government broke down, and the violence restarted. After the Jat agitation began in 2016, the Patidars flared up again and led a march through Gujarat, but protests in several cities turned violent and the [[Rapid Action Force]] was sent in.<ref name=":0" />
@@ Line 353: / Line 389: @@
 In January 2016, the [[Kapu (caste)|Kapu]] community in Andhra Pradesh began leading protests to be classified in Backward Classes. The agitation became violent when in [[Tuni]], Kapu protestors set trains on fire.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2016-12-03|title=Andhra's caste reservation protests to return? Kapu leaders chalk out action plan|url=https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/andhras-caste-reservation-protests-return-kapu-leaders-chalk-out-action-plan-53778|access-date=2021-02-08|website=The News Minute|language=en}}</ref> In 2019, the [[Telugu Desam Party]] which had just been made opposition, tabled a bill to have a 5% sub-quota for Kapus out of EWS reservation.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2019-07-17|title=Why trouble is brewing in Andhra over Kapu reservation once more|url=https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/why-trouble-brewing-andhra-over-kapu-reservation-once-more-105610|access-date=2021-02-08|website=The News Minute|language=en}}</ref>
-[[Maratha (caste)|Marathas]], the dominant caste of Maharashtra, have been agitating for OBC status since the 1990s. In 2016, after the rape and murder of a 15-year old Maratha girl in Kopardi, the Maratha community organized [[Maratha Kranti Morcha|massive protests]] throughout Maharashtra. Their demands included death for the accused as well as reservations for the Maratha community which makes up 16% of the state's population. Some road blocks turned violent in 2017 and 2018, but overall the protests were peaceful. Their demand was met when the Maharashtra government instituted a special SEBC category for them with 16% reservation.<ref name=":0" /> The Supreme Court of India later however, declared the SEBC reservation for Marathas as unconstitutional.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-05-05|title=Supreme  Court declares Maratha quota law unconstitutional |url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/sc-declares-maratha-quota-law-unconstitutional/article34487043.ece|access-date=2021-11-21|website=The Hindu|language=en}}</ref>
+[[Maratha (caste)|Marathas]], the dominant caste of Maharashtra, have been agitating for OBC status since the 1990s. In 2016, after the rape and murder of a 15-year old Maratha girl in Kopardi, the Maratha community organized [[Maratha Kranti Morcha|massive protests]] throughout Maharashtra. Their demands included death for the accused as well as reservations for the Maratha community which makes up 16% of the state's population. Some road blocks turned violent in 2017 and 2018, but overall the protests were peaceful. Their demand was met when the Maharashtra government instituted a special SEBC (Socially and Educationally Backward Classes) category for them with 16% reservation.<ref name=":0" /> The Supreme Court of India later however, declared the SEBC reservation for Marathas as unconstitutional.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-05-05|title=Supreme Court declares Maratha quota law unconstitutional |url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/sc-declares-maratha-quota-law-unconstitutional/article34487043.ece|access-date=2021-11-21|website=The Hindu|language=en}}</ref>
 == Economic status ==
@@ Line 382: / Line 418: @@
 ==Creamy layer==
 {{Main|Creamy layer}}
-The term ''creamy layer'' was first coined in 1974 in the ''State of Kerala vs N. M. Thomas'' case when a judge said that the "benefits of the reservation shall be snatched away by the top creamy layer of the backward class, thus leaving the weakest among the weak and leaving the fortunate layers to consume the whole cake".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/qrydisp.asp?tfnm=5862|title=Supreme Court Of India – Judgement Information System}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/oped/scourge-of-reservation-the-invisible-creamy-layer.html|title=Scourge of reservation: The invisible creamy layer|publisher=The Pioneer}}</ref> The 1992 [[Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India]] judgement laid down the limits of the state's powers: it upheld the ceiling of 50.21 percent quotas, emphasised the concept of "social backwardness", and prescribed 11 indicators to ascertain backwardness. The judgement also established the concept of qualitative exclusion, such as "creamy layer".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-order-reserved/|title=Explained: Order reserved|publisher=The Indian Express}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/building-a-just-society/|title=For an equitable society, reservations must be extended to private sector|date=23 October 2015|work=The Indian Express|access-date=2016-05-08}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/plea-to-reconsider-judgment-in-indra-sawhney-case-of-1992/article1897463.ece|title=Plea to reconsider judgement in Indra Sawhney case of 1992}}</ref> The creamy layer applies only to OBCs.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Cant-keep-SC/ST-creamy-layer-out-of-quota-benefits/articleshow/46914401.cms|title='Can't keep SC/ST creamy layer out of quota benefits' - Times of India|website=The Times of India|access-date=24 February 2019}}</ref> The creamy layer criteria were introduced at Rs 1 lakh in 1993 and revised to Rs 2.5 lakh in 2004, ₹4.5 lakh in 2008 and ₹6 lakh in 2013, but now the ceiling has been raised to ₹8 lakh (in September 2017).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Raise-creamy-layer-to-Rs-10-5-lakh-OBC-panel/articleshow/47155884.cms|title=Raise 'creamy layer' to Rs 10.5 lakh: OBC panel}}</ref> In October 2015, the [[National Commission for Backward Classes]] (NCBC) proposed that a person belonging to OBC with an annual family income of up to ₹15 lakh should be considered as minimum ceiling for OBC.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/OBC-panel-backs-off-wont-make-creamy-layer-reservation-criteria-stringent/articleshow/49545470.cms?|title=OBC panel backs off, won't make 'creamy layer' reservation criteria stringent}}</ref> The NCBC also recommended sub-division of OBCs into "backward", "more backward" and "extremely backward" groups and to divide the 27 per cent quota amongst them in proportion to their population, to ensure that stronger OBCs do not corner the quota benefits.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/OBC-sub-division-relaxing-creamy-layer-is-a-must-NCBC-tells-govt/articleshow/49532421.cms|title=OBC sub-division, relaxing creamy layer is a must: NCBC tells govt}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Raise-creamy-layer-to-Rs-10-5-lakh-OBC-panel/articleshow/47155884.cms|title=Raise 'creamy layer' to Rs 10.5 lakh: OBC panel|work=The Times of India|access-date=2016-05-08}}</ref>
+The term ''creamy layer'' was first coined in 1974 in the ''State of Kerala vs N. M. Thomas'' case when a judge said that the "benefits of the reservation shall be snatched away by the top creamy layer of the backward class, thus leaving the weakest among the weak and leaving the fortunate layers to consume the whole cake".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/qrydisp.asp?tfnm=5862|title=Supreme Court Of India – Judgement Information System}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/oped/scourge-of-reservation-the-invisible-creamy-layer.html|title=Scourge of reservation: The invisible creamy layer|publisher=The Pioneer}}</ref> The 1992 [[Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India]] judgement laid down the limits of the state's powers: it upheld the ceiling of 50.21 percent quotas, emphasised the concept of "social backwardness", and prescribed 11 indicators to ascertain backwardness. The judgement also established the concept of qualitative exclusion, such as "creamy layer".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-order-reserved/|title=Explained: Order reserved|publisher=The Indian Express}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/building-a-just-society/|title=For an equitable society, reservations must be extended to private sector|date=23 October 2015|work=The Indian Express|access-date=2016-05-08}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/plea-to-reconsider-judgment-in-indra-sawhney-case-of-1992/article1897463.ece|title=Plea to reconsider judgement in Indra Sawhney case of 1992|website=[[The Hindu]]}}</ref> The creamy layer applies only to OBCs.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Cant-keep-SC/ST-creamy-layer-out-of-quota-benefits/articleshow/46914401.cms|title='Can't keep SC/ST creamy layer out of quota benefits' - Times of India|website=The Times of India|access-date=24 February 2019}}</ref> The creamy layer criteria were introduced at Rs 1 lakh in 1993 and revised to Rs 2.5 lakh in 2004, ₹4.5 lakh in 2008 and ₹6 lakh in 2013, but now the ceiling has been raised to ₹8 lakh (in September 2017).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Raise-creamy-layer-to-Rs-10-5-lakh-OBC-panel/articleshow/47155884.cms|title=Raise 'creamy layer' to Rs 10.5 lakh: OBC panel|website=[[The Times of India]]}}</ref> In October 2015, the [[National Commission for Backward Classes]] (NCBC) proposed that a person belonging to OBC with an annual family income of up to ₹15 lakh should be considered as minimum ceiling for OBC.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/OBC-panel-backs-off-wont-make-creamy-layer-reservation-criteria-stringent/articleshow/49545470.cms?|title=OBC panel backs off, won't make 'creamy layer' reservation criteria stringent|website=[[The Times of India]]}}</ref> The NCBC also recommended sub-division of OBCs into "backward", "more backward" and "extremely backward" groups and to divide the 27 per cent quota amongst them in proportion to their population, to ensure that stronger OBCs do not corner the quota benefits.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/OBC-sub-division-relaxing-creamy-layer-is-a-must-NCBC-tells-govt/articleshow/49532421.cms|title=OBC sub-division, relaxing creamy layer is a must: NCBC tells govt|website=[[The Times of India]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Raise-creamy-layer-to-Rs-10-5-lakh-OBC-panel/articleshow/47155884.cms|title=Raise 'creamy layer' to Rs 10.5 lakh: OBC panel|work=The Times of India|access-date=2016-05-08}}</ref>
 ==Reservation in states==
@@ Line 431: / Line 467: @@
 * Economically Weaker Sections – no provision
-Chhattisgarh: Ordinance on OBC quota hike to 27% has lapsed, says high court.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Mar 2|first=Vijay Singh Thakur / TNN /|last2=2020|last3=Ist|first3=13:38|title=Chhattisgarh: Ordinance on OBC quota hike to 27% has lapsed, says high court {{!}} Raipur News - Times of India|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/raipur/chhattisgarh-ordinance-on-obc-quota-hike-to-27-has-lapsed-says-high-court/articleshow/74437913.cms|access-date=2021-10-28|website=The Times of India|language=en}}</ref>
+Chhattisgarh: Ordinance on OBC quota hike to 27% has lapsed, says high court.<ref>{{Cite web|author=Vijay Singh Thakur|date=Mar 2, 2020|title=Chhattisgarh: Ordinance on OBC quota hike to 27% has lapsed, says high court {{!}} Raipur News - Times of India|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/raipur/chhattisgarh-ordinance-on-obc-quota-hike-to-27-has-lapsed-says-high-court/articleshow/74437913.cms|access-date=2021-10-28|website=The Times of India|language=en}}</ref>
 === Delhi ===
@@ Line 489: / Line 525: @@
 * Economically Weaker Sections – 10%
-BC are currently classified as being in Annexure 1 and Annexure 2.<ref>{{Cite web|title=List of Castes under Category BC (ANNEXURE -II ) in Jharkhand|url=https://jharsewa.jharkhand.gov.in/resources/pdf/20/BC2.pdf|url-status=live|publisher=Government of Jharkhand}}</ref> The present government has proposed raising the OBC quota to 27% and both SC and ST quotas by 2%.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-03-19|title=‘Jharkhand would recommend SC to remove 50% cap on reservation’: CM|url=https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/ranchi-news/jharkhand-would-recommend-sc-to-remove-50-cap-on-reservation-cm-101616171065815.html|access-date=2021-11-21|website=Hindustan Times|language=en}}</ref>
+BC are currently classified as being in Annexure 1 and Annexure 2.<ref>{{Cite web|title=List of Castes under Category BC (ANNEXURE -II ) in Jharkhand|url=https://jharsewa.jharkhand.gov.in/resources/pdf/20/BC2.pdf|url-status=live|publisher=Government of Jharkhand}}</ref> The present government has proposed raising the OBC quota to 27% and both SC and ST quotas by 2%.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-03-19|title='Jharkhand would recommend SC to remove 50% cap on reservation': CM|url=https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/ranchi-news/jharkhand-would-recommend-sc-to-remove-50-cap-on-reservation-cm-101616171065815.html|access-date=2021-11-21|website=Hindustan Times|language=en}}</ref>
 === Maharashtra ===
-* Scheduled Castes (SC) (19%)
+* Scheduled Castes (SC) (13%)<ref name=":1">{{Cite web|date=2021-12-30|title=Political reservation for OBCs, now a Maha issue|url=https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/panorama/political-reservation-for-obcs-now-a-maha-issue-1065998.html|access-date=2022-02-12|website=Deccan Herald|language=en}}</ref>
 * Scheduled Tribes (ST) (7%)
 * Other Backward Classes (OBC) (19%)
@@ Line 505: / Line 541: @@
 ==See also==
+*[[Affirmative action]]
 *[[Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents]]
 *[[Court cases related to reservation in India]]
@@ Line 512: / Line 549: @@
 *[[Reservation policy in Tamil Nadu]]
 *[[Jat reservation agitation]]
+*[[Reverse discrimination#India|Reverse discrimination in India]]
 ==Notes==
@@ Line 536: / Line 574: @@
 {{DEFAULTSORT:Reservation In India}}
 [[Category:Reservation in India| ]]
-[[Category:Law in India]]
+[[Category:Law of India]]
 [[Category:Politics of India]]

Reservation in India: Difference between revisions

Reservation in India (edit)

Revision as of 15:14, 4 May 2022