• The functioning of constitutional democracy in India has produced paradoxes, including the creation of numerous statutory institutions and commissions.

• Despite the deepening of democratic ethos and a participatory culture, social cleavages have persisted, necessitating special mechanisms for the protection and promotion of rights and privileges.

• Indian society is in a transitional phase, where demands for exclusive structures to serve particular sections reflect ongoing communitarian and social contradictions.

• The proliferation of statutory institutions and commissions raises concern given the Constitution’s original perspective, as the fathers of the Constitution opposed creating sectarian bodies to protect particular social groups.

• Over time, India has seen the creation of numerous statutory bodies ostensibly to protect vulnerable sections whose interests were not safeguarded by existing laws and machinery.

• The acceptance of such bodies reflects changing social norms and the vulnerability of certain groups to oppression and victimization.

• These bodies were created with statutory powers and functions to effectively discharge responsibilities for protection and promotion of disadvantaged sections.

• The actual effectiveness of these institutions in safeguarding the interests of marginalized people requires serious investigation.

• The chapter aims to examine the structures and functions of selected statutory institutions and assess their performance in addressing social challenges.

NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR BACKWARD CLASSES

• The National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) was established in 1993 to provide a dedicated mechanism for the advancement of Other Backward Classes (OBCs).

• Its creation followed the clearance for implementing 27% reservation for OBCs in Central Government services.

• The formation of NCBC reflects the political maneuvering in India, where decisions were often influenced by one-upmanship rather than purely social justice concerns.

• Earlier reports, such as those by the Kaka Kalelkar Commission, on socio-educational backwardness, were largely ignored by successive governments.

• The Mandal Commission report was initially sidelined but later used by the V.P. Singh government as a political move to address challenges from the Deputy Prime Minister.

• The hasty implementation of Mandal Commission recommendations aimed at OBC reservations was controversial and misused for selfish political interests, leading to social division.

• This misuse was compared to the MacDonald Award of 1932, where the British attempted to create societal divisions under the guise of affirmative discrimination.

• The Supreme Court in Indira Sawhney & Others vs Union of India validated the establishment of NCBC as a statutory body, providing a legal framework for its functioning.

• NCBC was thus institutionalized to ensure protection and advancement of socially and educationally backward classes in India.

Structure

• The idea of the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) is constitutionally provided under Article 340(1).

• Article 340(1) empowers the President to appoint a Commission to investigate conditions of socially and educationally backward classes, examine their difficulties, and recommend steps for the Union or State to improve their conditions, including grants and their terms.

• Article 340(2) mandates the Commission to investigate, report factual conditions, and make recommendations to better the lot of backward classes.

• Since Independence, the constitutional mandate was often misused for political expediency, leading to delays and social turmoil, eventually requiring Supreme Court intervention.

• The Supreme Court directed the Government to constitute the NCBC in accordance with Article 340, leading to the National Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993.

• The NCBC is a permanent body at the Central level consisting of:

  • Chairman – retired Chief Justice of a High Court or retired Supreme Court judge

  • Member Secretary – senior Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer with knowledge of OBC issues

  • Two expert members – social scientists with theoretical and conceptual knowledge of the Indian social system and OBC problems

• The NCBC functions as a quasi-judicial expert body advising the Central Government on pruning and consolidating the list of OBCs for benefits.

• The first office bearers in 1993 were:

  • Chairman: Justice (Retd.) R.N. Prasad

  • Member Secretary: P.S. Krishnan

  • Expert Members: Dhirubhai Seth and Dinesh Yadav

• The composition reflected the intended purpose of the Commission to address OBC integration and upliftment in the social mainstream.

Functions

• The functions of the NCBC under the NCBC Act, 1993, are primarily advisory regarding modifications to the Central list of OBCs.

• No caste or class can claim permanent backwardness; communities are expected to move upward socially and educationally with the benefits of preferential treatment.

• Classes not in the Central list of OBCs can be included during periodic reviews.

• The NCBC Act, 1993 mandates the Central Government to:

  • Undertake revision of the OBC list at any time and every ten years thereafter.

  • Exclude classes that have ceased to be backward and include new backward classes.

• The objective is to ensure egalitarianism by progressively minimizing preferential treatment as marginalized sections join the social mainstream.

• Section 9(1) of the Act assigns the NCBC two primary functions:

  1. Consider requests for inclusion of any class as a backward class in the Central list. This requires the Commission to function permanently due to ongoing requests.

  2. Act as complaint authority for petitions of over-inclusion or under-inclusion of backward classes.

• The Commission adjudicates cases where:

  • Classes clash for inclusion despite not qualifying.

  • Eligible classes have not been included in the Central list.

• The NCBC acts as the exclusive Central-level agency to:

  • Determine claims of backward class status.

  • Adjudicate disputes on over-inclusion or under-inclusion in the Central list.

• Recommendations of the NCBC are ordinarily binding on the Central Government, but the Government retains the right to modify or reject recommendations in extreme cases.