[Reader-list] 'Striking AIIMS docs live in a glass house'

[Aman Sethi]

My two cents worth ... an article i wrote for the frontline -
http://www.flonnet.com/stories/20060616003302500.htm
A.



 "QUOTAS," reads the poster on the wall at All India Institute of
Medical Sciences (AIIMS), "this cure is worse than the disease."
Standing around the poster in white "No Reservation" T-shirts, a group
of students from medical colleges around Delhi discussed how best to
ensure that reservation reached only those "who truly needed it the
most", ensuring that the benefits were not siphoned off by the "creamy
layer".

The doctors' strike was called off on May 31 following a Supreme Court
order. But 20 days of agitations, strikes and protests by upper-caste
students, doctors and faculty members of the AIIMS and other medical
colleges across the country had ensured that the anti-reservation
campaign got a more-than-fair hearing. The protests were organised in
opposition to the proposed 27 per cent hike in reserved seats in
Central universities, from 22.5 per cent to 49.5 per cent, under the
banner of Youth for Equality - a forum initiated by students of five
medical colleges. In a statement to a news channel, Youth for Equality
spokesperson Anirudh Lochan explained that while the doctors had
decided to call off the strike, students from Delhi University, Indian
Institute of Technology - Delhi and others across the country would
continue the protests.

While the protests garnered hours of television footage and miles of
newsprint, few seemed familiar with the exact demands put forward by
the striking doctors. A possible reason could be the lack of coherence
in the movement itself. What began as a strident desh bachao movement
against reservation in the name of merit, equality and "the future of
the country" transformed into a movement in support of "affirmative
action" but not "reservation" and culminated in an impassioned plea
against the "misuse of reservation".

The first charter of demands put up on the Youth for Equality web site
demanded the deferral of the proposed hike in reservation in all
Central universities. However, hours before the strike was called off,
it carried a new charter of demands that simply asked the government
to ensure that the general category seats were not reduced below 50.5
per cent - thereby accepting the 27 per cent hike in reservation,
withdrawing their most important demand, and leaving a trail of
flummoxed students, unsure what they were fighting for and to what
purpose.

Dismissing insinuations of incoherence, Dr. Anindya Banerjee,
vice-president of the Association of Resident Doctors, Post-Graduate
Institute of Medicine, Chandigarh, argues that the movement was never
against reservation: "It was against the use of reservation for
political ends." Banerjee believes in the urgent need for an
"apolitical" review of the entire reservation process and for the
formulation of a transparent reservation policy on the part of the
government.

Another major concern that the doctors claim to espouse is that
reservation would go to the "so-called backward castes" and not to the
"truly backward". Truly backward castes, the argument goes, have not
even gained access to schools and hence are unable to take up seats
that are rightfully theirs. Being unavailable to the general category,
these seats are then taken by the so-called backwards. The solution,
according to most, is affirmative action without reservations where
the state invests in primary and secondary education and provides
scholarships and asistance to outstanding students from
under-privileged backgrounds.

The anti-reservation camp has also been categorical about its
opposition to what it terms caste-based vote-bank politics. "Let's not
make this a caste thing," says Dr. Divyajot Singh Vinayak of General
Medical College, Chandigarh. "Reservation should be on the basis of
economic criteria. After all, there are economically under-privileged
Brahmins too." A number of upper-caste doctors and students told
Frontline that reservation actually increased caste stigmatisation by
drawing distinctions between general and reserved category students,
leading to low self-esteem among the latter.

Students also spew impressive, yet sadly unverifiable, statistics on
dropout rates among reserved category seats, on hundreds of reserved
seats across the country that are allegedly lying vacant for wont of
eligible candidates and on how, as per National Sample Survey
Organisation (NSSO) statistics, OBCs already hold 23 per cent of all
university seats. While Frontline was unable to verify the
authenticity of the data, what is clear is that a complete paucity of
information and data on reservation has contributed to a debate where
every possibility and scenario (both for and against) is almost as
plausible as every other.

Every afternoon, not far from the anti-reservation protests, a small
group staged a rally in favour of reservation. Calling themselves
"Youth for Equal Opportunity", this motley crew of faculty members,
doctors and students chose patient care over protests and staged a
demonstration only during their lunch hours. Dr. Sukhbir Singh Badhal
is one of them.

Badhal is a Scheduled Caste member from Gugahedi village in Rohtak
district, Haryana. His father was a daily wage labourer who earned
between Rs.60 and Rs.100 a day and could barely afford to send his
children to school. Badhal got his first break when he got into a
local Navodaya Vidyalaya, run under a scheme started by the Rajiv
Gandhi government to help under-privileged children, and graduated
with a specialisation in life sciences. He then completed his MBBS
from a government college in Rohtak, and is at present in his final
year in post-graduate specialisation in Lab Medicine on a reserved
seat.

Badhal says that his career improved the lives of most members of his
family. His younger brothers can now afford to attend private school,
and his father no longer has to work as a labourer. His companion at
the rally, Dr. Sandeep Sabarwal, is another example of how reservation
works. An OBC member from Sonipat district in Haryana, Sabarwal also
made it to an undergraduate medical college in Rohtak through a
reservation. He topped the general category All India Post Graduate
Entrance Examination for a Masters in Dental Surgery last year. "As
AIIMS had no reservation for OBCs, I gave the General Exam and topped
it," he says. "But without reservation in my undergraduate course, I
would never have made it."

Students in favour of reservation point out that a faulty school
system only makes the need for reserved seats in higher education
essential. Sabarwal would like to ask the anti-reservationists just
one question: "What will you tell students who have spent their whole
lives battling prejudice, poverty, and non-existent schools only to
lose out to private-school educated, tuition-coached city kids?"
Sabarwal's case also flies in the face of the "merit dilution"
argument. He points out that most doctors who graduate from medical
colleges are equally qualified and that most entrance examinations now
have syllabi that go far beyond the school syllabi. Expensive tuitions
are thus the only way to get into these elite-dominated institutes.

Students also point out that harassment, humiliation and
discrimination are a reality in all institutions across the country, a
situation that is supported by some members of the faculty.
"Harassment by upper-caste students and faculty is the major cause for
high dropout rates among reserved category students, not lack of
merit," says a faculty member speaking on condition of anonymity. "In
my assessment, reserved category students are as meritorious as any
other student."

Unfortunately, the narrow parameters of the reservation debate have
ensured that reserved category students shall continue to fight
accusations of inability and incompetence. "If you get into college
through reservation and do badly, it's because you don't deserve to be
here," remarks an OBC student. "And if you do well, then you are not
`truly backward'. It seems we are incompetent by definition."

	



On 6/6/06, Shuddhabrata Sengupta <shuddha at sarai.net> wrote:
> Dear all, especially Pankaj
>
>
> I am grateful to Pankaj Kaushal for having pointed out to me my error in
> assuming that Brigadiers are senior to Generals. It shows how ignorant I
> am of the protocol and chain of command in the military, something I
> shall promise to recompense for by studying the arcana of the chain of
> command.
>
> In the light of Pankaj's timely correction, I should amend my proposal,
> the 'General' category should be upgraded to the 'Field Marshall', I
> take it, that barring the post of the C-in-C, which happens to be
> reserved for the president of the Republic, one can go no higher. Is
> this true?
>
> yours corrected,
>
> Shuddha
>
>
> Pankaj kaushal wrote:
>
> >>2. The argument that people who come in through the so called 'general'
> >>(should it be upgraded to 'brigadier' category) do so on grounds of
> >
> >
> > A general is actually a higher rank than a brigadier, if your "joke" was
> > referring to that.
> >
> > P.
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe in the subject header.
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>