Religion-Based Quota A Trigger For Polarisation

Currently, a wide debate is firming up over the issue of reservations in general, and those based on religion in particular for extending them beyond the education and employment sphere to the award of government contracts. The trigger came from Karnataka. Not only eyebrows even concerns have been raised on constitutional, social, and political grounds following the Congress government’s decision to provide a 4 per cent reservation for Muslims in government contracts.

Post an announcement during the 2025-26 Budget presentation on March 7, the Karnataka assembly on March 21 passed a bill, intending to amend Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements (KTPP). It provides for 4 per cent reservation to Muslims under Category-2B in public contracts below Rs 2 crore and for procurement of goods and services below Rs 1 crore through various government departments. The government has justified its move pointing to its avowed concern for the welfare of minorities, addressing their socio-economic disparities faced on account of religion. It seeks to foster inclusivity and promote equal opportunities for them. Its leaders cited complaints from Muslims that they were being discriminated against in the award of contracts. It may be recalled that such a reservation already exists for SC & ST (24%) and OBCs (4% for category 1 and 15% for category 2A) in the state.

The Congress categorically backed its government’s gesture to Muslims, saying it amounted to affirmative action. The Indian Constitution implies an affirmative action is making policies and grounding measures aimed at promoting social, political and educational equality for historically marginalised groups. This is to provide better access to opportunities and resources to SCs, STs and OBCs. However, the Constitution does not allow for religion-based reservations. Article 15 expressly prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth and allows the state to make special provisions for the advancement of only socially and educationally backward classes of citizens.

Affirmative actions’ overarching goals are social justice and equality i.e., level-playing field for disadvantaged groups. Article 46 specifically enjoins the governments to promote the educational and economic interests of SCs and STs and OBCs. Of course, successive governments and political parties have been rooting for raising the quotas to levels beyond 50% stipulated by the apex court on the grounds of fairness and meritocracy.

Naturally, the BJP bristled and called the move ‘sarkari jihad’. It alleged that in this government, anything anti-Hindu gets ratified instantly. Apart from sparking debates, the government’s move is causing dissension among its supporters, too.

The government action may impinge upon the socio-political landscape of the state, and, thus, it has huge implications for the Congress party’s future.

In the past, such an exercise was held unconstitutional by High Courts and the Supreme Court. They set aside attempts by governments to introduce religion-based reservations for Muslims in united Andhra Pradesh,

Maharashtra and West Bengal. Religion-based reservations, notwithstanding socio-economic benefits for religious minorities, also cause social disharmony and even unrest in society. It may encourage conversions, exacerbating religious tensions, if any. In the end, it must be accepted, more so by political parties, that poverty and disadvantage exist across all religions. The Congress bases its argument on the assertion that Muslims face the same socio-economic challenges as those enjoying caste-based reservations. Generally addressing the economic upliftment needs of the poor of all communities, with feasible and realistic solutions that are reviewed periodically for their efficacy – for a more just society – is the best approach to the vexatious issue. The bill is likely to face challenges in courts to test its constitutionality.