Dr Asangba Tzudir
The present form of the Nagaland Staff Selection Board regulation 2020 was rejected by the ENSF citing “deliberate suppression and deprived in all aspects for the last six decades”, and listed seven demands that included earmarking 45% of posts for the six tribes of Eastern Naga Tribes for 20 years till the tribes are at par with the rest of the other Nagas. It said that the demands have been made in order to constitute a fair, equal and just NSSB.
In opposition, the Core Committee on Rationalisation of Reservation Policy (CCoRoRP) has written to the Nagaland Chief Minister reiterating its demand for rationalization of reservation policy and its implementation with “reasonable and logical perspective which would ensure the progression of our people holistically.” The committee called for implementation of ‘Creamy layer’ policy on reservation, pocket-wise reservation, equal criteria on educational qualification for all jobs, category options for all competitive exams, cut-off mark on reservation quota with no backlog vacancy, and further called for constitution of an “effective body,” stating that the current reservation policy is “redundant, rugged and unjust in this proportion” and called for an “objectively rationale and systematic academic review of the policy.”
While the demand for 45% is contentious, the calculated timeframe of 20 years till ‘they’ are at par with the rest of the other Nagas requires a serious rethinking because it will take not only 20 years but probably forever for all Nagas to be in a situation where all Nagas are at par with each other. The vantage point for the demand for 45% reservation is viewed from the disparity in the ratio of Government employees among the so called ‘forward’ and the ‘backward’ Naga tribes though in the larger canopy of the Indian Union, all Nagas fall under the category called reserved.
Let 45% reservation be granted to Eastern Nagaland brethrens. However, the same yardstick of reservation should be applied for the ‘so called forward’ tribes too because the ‘so called forward’ is just a thin creamy layer below which is the ‘backward.’ What if each Naga tribe is reserved an EAC post or a post of Assistant Professor, and likewise for other posts? Won’t this be more justifiable on the part of NSSB to be fair, equal and just when it comes to equitable distribution of posts in the Government sector?
However, in deliberations on reservation requires a serious rethinking and more so reconceptualizing. That, in tune with what the CCoRoRP has highlighted calling for implementation of ‘Creamy layer’ policy on reservation, and pocket-wise reservation besides others, and looking from the prism of upliftment and equitable development, such steps makes more rational sense than random percentages reservation in spite of the huge disparity between the ‘forward’ and ‘backward’ tribes.
Towards rationalization and reconceptualizing of reservation, there has to be ‘exceptions to the rule’ when it comes to ‘creamy layer’ among tribes, a fact which cannot now be ignored if reservation seeks to be just and equitable. As for the pocket-wise reservation, it may be applied as a privilege yardstick, but after due considerations of the underlying realities, where, for instance, for the same income slab families, some can send their children to good educational institutions. As such the place of study of the qualifying degree becomes important while considering reservation or privileging the ‘deserving.’
While it is imperative that a holistic approach that seeks to address the disparities be set in place, quality should not be sacrificed at the altar of reservation because the State as a whole cannot develop holistically simply through reservation.
(Dr Asangba Tzudir contributes a weekly guest editorial to the Morung Express. Comments can be emailed to asangtz@gmail.com)
