Will Muslims get a quota in govt contracts in Karnataka?

medium118978379On March 7, Karnataka chief minister Siddaramaiah presented his 16th state budget, a financial roadmap that placed a strong emphasis on minority welfare, infrastructure development, and social schemes. Among his major announcements were ₹1,000 crore for minority development, ₹150 crore for Waqf property protection, and a salary hike for imams and muezzins.Additionally, ₹100 crore was allocated to Urdu-medium schools, along with provisions for self-defence training and fee reimbursement for minority students. The budget also included salary increases for temple and gurdwara priests, along with ₹1,800 crore to boost Bengaluru’s brand and a continuation of the free bus travel scheme for women.However, what sparked the most intense debate was Siddaramaiah’s proposal to amend the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurement (KTPP) Act to allot 4% of all government contracts (each not exceeding ₹2 crore) exclusively to Muslim contractors.How has the government justified the move?The Congress government has argued that the policy is not about religion but about addressing socio-economic backwardness. The administration cites multiple reports, including the Sachar Committee report (2006) and studies by the Karnataka State Minorities Commission, which indicate that a significant proportion of Karnataka’s Muslim population falls under the economically weaker category. The government contends that the move aligns with the principle of social justice enshrined in the Constitution.Addressing the assembly, Siddaramaiah stated, “This is not appeasement but affirmative action. The data shows that Muslims are underrepresented in government contracts and economic opportunities. Just as SCs (scheduled castes), STs (scheduled tribes), and OBCs (other backward classes) have been given support to overcome historical disadvantages, this move will create a level playing field for an economically backward section of society.”Karnataka already reserves 24% of contracts for SCs and STs, 4% for OBCs in Category-I, and 15% for OBCs in Category-IIA. If the proposed 4% Muslim quota under Category-IIB (economically and socially backward Muslim communities) is implemented, overall reservations in government contracts would increase to 47%.Our research found similar measures in other states, which could serve as precedents in the legal debate over Karnataka’s proposal:Andhra Pradesh (2019): The state introduced a 50% reservation in government contracts for SCs, STs, BCs, and minorities. The minority quota was specifically for Muslim groups classified under the BC-E category (a sub-category within the OBC system for Muslims identified as backward.)Uttar Pradesh (2009): The state reserved 21% of government contracts for SCs and 2% for STs, but there was no specific reservation for Muslims. medium118978431Are reservations for Muslims new in Karnataka?While a quota in government contracts is news, the state has a history of providing reservations for Muslims.In 1995, the then chief minister, HD Deve Gowda, implemented 4% reservations for 36 Muslim castes under the 2B category in the OBC quota. This had followed recommendations from the Justice O Chinnappa Reddy Commission (1990). These castes were already listed as OBCs under the central government’s framework.This reservation remained in place for nearly three decades until March 2023, when the Basavaraj Bommai-led BJP government scrapped the 4% Muslim quota and redistributed it among Lingayats and Vokkaligas, two dominant caste groups in Karnataka.The move was widely criticised by Muslim organisations and Opposition parties, who accused the BJP of removing affirmative action meant for a disadvantaged community for political gains ahead of the assembly election.The decision to revoke the Muslim quota was challenged before the Supreme Court, which put the implementation of the Bommai government’s decision on hold until a final verdict was reached.During the hearing, the Supreme Court made several critical observations against the government order, after which the solicitor general stated before the court that the state government would not implement the decision. The case remains pending, adding further legal complexity to the current reservation debate.The debate over Muslim reservations is also not new. While some state governments have attempted to introduce religion-based reservations, courts have repeatedly struck them down if they were solely based on religion rather than socio-economic backwardness.However, Karnataka’s past implementation of Muslim quotas under OBC categories could strengthen the legal case for the current proposal.But is the move even legal?The validity of Karnataka’s move is legally complex. While similar reservations for SCs, STs, and OBCs in government contracts have been upheld in courts before, this is the first time such a provision has been extended specifically to Muslims as a community.The Allahabad high court, in a 2009 ruling, upheld a Uttar Pradesh government order reserving 21% of government contracts for SCs and 2% for STs.Petitioners had challenged the move under Article 19(1)(g) (right to practice a profession), arguing that it infringed upon their rights. However, the court ruled that the reservation was valid under Article 15(4), which allows the state to make special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes.The Karnataka high court, in 2017, upheld a similar reservation policy introduced by Siddaramaiah, which reserved contracts valued below ₹50 lakh for SC/ST contractors. The ruling ensured that reservations in government contracts were constitutionally valid under Article 46, which promotes the economic interests of weaker sections.Another crucial legal reference is the 1992 Supreme Court ruling on the Mandal Commission (Indra Sawhney case), which stated that:Backward class under Article 16(4) cannot be read as backward caste alone. The term ‘backward class’ is broad and should include all socio-economically disadvantaged communities, not just certain castes.Reservations can apply to all communities, including Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, and others, if they meet the criteria for social and educational backwardness.This ruling provides constitutional backing for reservations to be extended to Muslims as a socially and educationally backward community, rather than solely as a religious group.What now?With the Karnataka assembly set to debate the amendment to the KTPP Act in the coming weeks, the issue is expected to remain in the spotlight.Political analysts suggest that the Congress government may modify the proposal to include a broader economically weaker section (EWS) reservation to strengthen its legal standing.Legal challenges are likely to reach the Supreme Court, where the decision could set a national precedent on reservations for religious minorities in government contracts.As Karnataka’s political landscape evolves, this controversy is shaping up to be a defining issue, testing the limits of affirmative action, constitutional interpretation, and the role of religion in policymaking.The ultimate decision — whether by the courts or the ballot box — will have ramifications beyond Karnataka, influencing how states across India approach the issue. medium118978511