The interim report of the Veerappa Moily Oversight Committee looking into reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in higher education was recently presented to the Government and, not surprisingly, its recommendations have created quite a stir. Karan Thapar talks to the Chairman of the committee, Veerappa Moily.
Karan Thapar: Mr Moily, let us start with the issue that is most in the news. Now that you have received the interim reports of all the five different sub-groups, do you believe it is possible to increase the intake by 54 per cent at one go next year? Or do you believe it needs to be staggered over a given period of time?
Veerappa Moily: These are the problems that are being posed by all the sub-groups. With the kind of mindset they are in, it is not possible to implement it at one go.
Karan Thapar: So what is your opinion as the Chairman of the Oversight Committee?
Veerappa Moily: I wanted to know the specific problems from them. They have sorted out most of the problems. I said as far as funding is concerned, it would be met. Also infrastructure, faculty and other requirements would be duly fulfilled. I have said time and again that we will go in for innovative methods.
Karan Thapar: You have just said that every one of the five sub-groups have asked for a period of time. Not one of them is in favour of implementing the increase and intake at one go. So when you ask the sub-groups that you want to know their problems, are you trying to persuade them into doing it in one go, or are you asking their problems so that it helps you agree with what they want? What is it?
Veerappa Moily: There is no question of ‘bulldozing’ the implementation of 54 per cent. We are clear about it. But at the same time, there are certain concerns and problems that need to be addressed. We have been more proactive on that. We said these are all the innovative methods. We have listed all the innovative methods, infrastructure needs, unprecedented flow of funds to be made available. With that, I would like them to examine, give the detailed project report. Thereafter, I would examine institution-wise and decide whether they can implement the reservation in one go or not.
Karan Thapar: So, what you are doing is that you saying to them “I will make the funds and the resources available. Think about your positions once again.” But if they come back in their final report and stick to what they have said in their interim report and you then discover that all five sub-groups still want a given period of time and none is in favour of implementing it immediately, then will you accept that phasing is inevitable?
Veerappa Moily: They may not come up with the same views. I know it because I have talked with a number of chairpersons of these institutions.
Karan Thapar: Let me quote to you what the Central Universities Group has said on page seven of its interim report. It says: “The expansion of capacity by 54 per cent in one spurt would neither be feasible nor desirable.”
Now, clearly a group that says “this kind of a change is neither feasible nor desirable” is not going to change its mind. They are most likely to stick to their position and remember the Central Universities are not asking for one or two years. But they want a period between three and five years.
Then let me add, Dr Samuel Paul, the head of the management group told The Times of India on July 29: “We have reached a conclusion that in the first year, the total expansion of the six Indian Institute of Management (IIMs) can only be 25 per cent.”
In its interim report, the management group has asked not for one or two years, but an unspecified period of time. How will you persuade these people that they do it in one go?
Veerappa Moily: I am not going to persuade. I am going to deliberate on them. That is why after I receive the final reports from all these groups by the 15th of this month; I have called a series of meetings with the individual institutions, the governing council chairpersons and the apex council chairpersons. I am going to discuss with them threadbare. I know the impossibilities.
Karan Thapar: I understand it’s always sensible to discuss things threadbare. But let me point out that the ‘year-wise phasing of expenditure’, which is an annexure in your own interim report, makes it clear that a total sum of Rs 16,653 crores that you have envisaged is in fact to be phased over five years, and only 25 per cent of that money is forthcoming in your plan.
So, your own financial planning suggests that in fact the ‘increase in intake’ will not take place in one go. It will be phased in over five years.
Veerappa Moily: That need not be connected with the ‘phasing-over’. That is the spreadover for the 11th ‘Five-Year Plan.’ Suppose they are capable of spending earlier, I don’t think the government will hesitate to release that kind of a funding.
Karan Thapar: If the government is capable of releasing the fund earlier, it may release it, but more to the point, if your sub-groups are not prepared to increase the in-take earlier, your planning gives them up to five years to do it depending upon what the final judgment is?
Veerappa Moily: That is correct.
Karan Thapar: Let me point out one more thing. Your interim report says, “Expansion, inclusion and excellence are the moving spirit behind the new reservation policy. If you don’t stagger the increase, you will either damage excellence or worst still, you may end up destroying it. That is why agreeing to the sub-groups and staggering, as they want, is essential.”
Veerappa Moily: Let me explain it like this. When we were small kids, we used to run after the kite so that we can capture the sky which we thought is beyond the hill. As we grew up we realised that the sky is much far away than we thought it really is.
The situation here is just like that. It is a question of mindset that one has. Once the mindset is changed, you can make way for alterations.
Karan Thapar: In the beginning of this interview, you seemed to suggest that you had an open mind about staggering, that you will try to persuade the sub-groups to change their position.
But if they don’t agree to it and still insist on sticking to their request for extra time, then you will agree to extra time and you will endorse that demand for staggering. That is still your position, isn’t it?
Veerappa Moily: No, there is a slight amendment. I do stand by that I have an open mind. Another point will be that with the kind proactive approach taken by the Oversight Committee or the government on the question of infrastructure, faculty and funding, it may be possible that these institutions may change their mind.
Karan Thapar: And what if they don’t their change their mind?
Veerappa Moily: I am not going to persuade. Because I want this expansion, inclusion and excellence -- all the three objectives -- laid down.
Karan Thapar: You have said a very important thing: you will not get them to change their mind. So, if they come back with their original position as expressed in the interim reports, then at that stage the Oversight Committee will accept that staggering is inevitable.
Veerappa Moily: There are two things -- one is taking the final report on the face value. Another point is the brainstorming session that I will have as an interaction. Critical examination of each and every problem posed by each of these institutions will be done. Thereafter, outside the Oversight Committee, I am going to invite on August 28-29 experts from all over the country to discuss as to what could be the course of action.
Karan Thapar: I understand all that. But suppose that at the end of that process, you find that the sub-groups have not changed their position? And I have quoted to you how emphatically they hold their views.
Suppose at the end of all your wider consultations, people also say to you, ‘staggering is sensible’, then at that stage, will you accept that staggering is ‘inevitable’?
Veerappa Moily: That is for the Oversight Committee to take a holistic approach. One thing I must tell you, we will have a holistic approach. The idea is to prepare a comprehensive roadmap to achieve the ultimate goal.
Karan Thapar: Let me point something else to you. Newspaper reports, in particular, in the Business Standard on the July 28 and August 3 are already saying that it is likely that you will split the 54 per cent overall increase into two slabs of 27 each. Which would be in fact 13.5 for the OBC (Other Backward Classes) and 13.5 for the protection of the other reserved categories split into two, and that you will do it in two stages and perhaps in two years.
You have not denied those reports and theses have been in the papers for at least a week to two weeks.
Veerappa Moily: As I have told you already, it is an open-ended decision. I will take this decision with the Oversight Committee only after I get the final report. That is why I am keeping my mind open, this side or that side -- both channels are open.
Karan Thapar: So when you say that your mind is open, it could go either way, isn’t it? It is at the moment 50-50 and could go either way?
Veerappa Moily: Depending upon the detailed project report submitted by each institution, it may vary from institution to institution. Some institutions may come forward and say with the kind of proposal, which is made by the Oversight Committee; we can go in one way. It is likely to happen. While some may say that it is impossible even if all the facilities are lined up. This may happen.
Karan Thapar: So, you will allow individual institutions to decide? Those that can do it at one go next year will do it. Whereas those who want extra time will be given the extra time if they are determined they need it. Is that correct?
Veerappa Moily: That is very correct.
Karan Thapar: Then let me put this to you. Many members of your Oversight committee, in particular Bhalchandra Mungekar (member of the Planning Commission) and Sukhadeo Thorat (Chairman, University Grants Commission) believe that the question of staggering is beyond the remit of the Oversight Committee.
They think that you are over-extending yourself by entertaining even the possibility of staggering the increase. What would you say to them?
Veerappa Moily: That is their personal opinion. I don’t think that personal opinions will have an influence over the entire committee. The Oversight Committee consists of many people and everybody’s views will be taken into consideration. But ultimately, the main theme of not disturbing the excellence will prevail above all these issues.
Karan Thapar: So, the main theme is to not disturb the excellence and everything else is subordinate.
Veerappa Moily: Yes, very much. Each thing is important because after all the expansion has to go ahead. But indeed ‘not disturbing the excellence’ is the main theme.
Karan Thapar: Let’s now turn to another contentious issue, which is how you deal with the so-called ‘Creamy Layer’? In employment, the ‘Creamy Layer’ of the OBCs is excluded from reservations. Should they be similarly excluded in terms of education?
Veerappa Moily: It is a debatable point and that is why I have not discussed it in the interim report and kept this question for the final report.
Karan Thapar: Your interim report says “the issue concerning the ‘Creamy Layer’ is being considered by the committee and a view will be taken in the final report.” What steps are you taking to consider it and how you are considering it?
Veerappa Moily: It is a question of design of implementation of the reservation order. There are two debates. One group says that so far as education is concerned ‘Creamy Layer’ should be included because you cannot capture the entire upper class. Another group says that if the ‘Creamy Layer’ is not included, then the people who are mighty and rich will lock away the entire lot of reservation.
Karan Thapar: Is this debate happening at the level of your Oversight Committee?
Veerappa Moily: Yes. This is at the level if the Oversight Committee and also it is being debated all over the country.
Karan Thapar: Is it within the remit of the Oversight Committee to consider whether the ‘Creamy Layer’ should be included or excluded? I ask you this because the terms of reference as laid out in your order of May 29, that set up the Oversight Committee, make no reference of it whatsoever.
Veerappa Moily: Not necessary. After all the policy of implementation is within the jurisdiction of the Oversight Committee. So, we are taking the design of implementation into consideration. The ‘Creamy Layer’ is one of the components of the implementation process.
Karan Thapar: So what you have done is that you have decided yourself that this subject is subsumed under your remit and you have the right to look at it.
Veerappa Moily: That’s correct.
Karan Thapar: The problem is that perhaps as many as five members of your Oversight Committee seem to disagree.
Bhalchandra Mungekar, Sukhadeo Thorat and at this instance I’m told that even Education Secretary Sudeep Banerjee and perhaps two other people -- making it a total of five --- believe that this is not a subject for the Oversight Committee to be looking into.
Veerappa Moily: It is for them to raise the issue and deliberate it in the Oversight Committee instead of voicing it in the press.
Karan Thapar: In other words, you are saying that if they have differences they should keep quiet about it, discuss it internally and not go public.
Veerappa Moily: They better do.
Karan Thapar: You recent them going public?
Veerappa Moily: It’s not appropriate. Just that.
Karan Thapar: You know, of course, that Bhalchandra Mungekar has actually written you a formal letter, disagreeing with your views and recording his dissent with your opinion that the final report will decide what happens to the ‘Creamy Layer’.
Veerappa Moily: I think keeping open any issue is not an offence. It can be taken up in the final meeting. Whatever views these members have they can raise it in the meeting.
Karan Thapar: So you are saying to the so-called ‘dissenting members’ that they should keep an open mind, don’t judge the issue in advance, let the debate happen first.
Veerappa Moily: I must be frank enough to tell you that there was no dissent. The opinion was consensus and total consensus in the interim report. I hope that a similar thing happens in the final report.
Karan Thapar: Some of these dissenting members claim that they were not shown the final draft of the interim report before it was sent.
Veerappa Moily: Once a report is approved by the committee, the usual practice is that it is not shown again to each and every member.
Karan Thapar: Let me raise a third issue that is becoming contentious. It is, in fact, your recommendation that the cut-off mark for OBCs in Central Universities should be somewhere mid-way between the cut-off marks for the SC/ST (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) and the unreserved category. Why is it not at the same level as the SC/STs? Why are you putting it mid-way i.e. higher?
Veerappa Moily: OBCs are not equivalent to SC/STs.
Karan Thapar: But many OBCs disagree. They say that the disadvantages they have suffered are the same.
Veerappa Moily: It’s not a question of agreeing or not agreeing. The Oversight Committee in its interim report has decided it.
Karan Thapar: But is the Oversight Committee united in deciding this or do they have differences that you have ‘papered over’?
Veerappa Moily: No. The Oversight Committee takes these decisions. They are united in deciding this.
Karan Thapar: Let me point out to you what could have been the problem with this particular decision that puts the marks mid-way in between.
In the case of the IIMs, IITs and AIIMS, in fact, what you have recommended is that the threshold for admission should be determined by the respective institutions alone commensurate with the level of excellence they enjoy. Which means that these institutions could chose to put the cut-off mark so high that it is only just below the unreserved category.
Veerappa Moily: Yes, they could do that. It is left to them because as it is, they do it. IITs, IIMs and AIIMS decide their own threshold marks between the SC/ST and the general (unreserved) category. Having said that, we are also giving back the decision only to them.
Karan Thapar: Because you have allowed the IITs, IIMs and AIIMS to fix their threshold mark as high as they want, add to that the recommendation of the management sub-groups which says: “there must be no unjustifiable demand on the institutes to lower the admission standards”, it means that if these groups set their standards or cut-off marks unreasonably high, you cannot put pressure upon them to bring it down.
Veerappa Moily: No, the interim report itself makes it very clear that the threshold mark will be fixed by the individual groups. We won’t put pressure on them to bring it down.
Karan Thapar: So, even if other people find their cut-offs unreasonably high, you still have to accept it.
Veerappa Moily: Let me be really frank with you. It is working really well. With regard to the SC/ST reservation, we have already asked these institutions to take their own stand.
Karan Thapar: Let me ask you a rather blunt question. Given the sort of terms and conditions for reservations that your interim group has accepted from IITs, IIMs and AIIMS, how many OBCs do you think would be able to benefit from reservations?
Because you have allowed these organizations to set the cut-off mark as they want, you have also given them the power to undermine OBC reservations as a result, that’s the problem.
Veerappa Moily: Just ground realities are available. For example the SC/ST threshold has been fixed. Do you think that SC/ST did not join at all?
Just now I got information from IITs that SC/ST are admitted in full at all the IITs.
Karan Thapar: But the difference between the SC/ST cut-off level and OBCs could be huge. Because the cut-off level for OBCs at the IITs, IIMs and AIIMS could be just below the unreserved category. In other words, it may be too high for most OBCs and you have accepted that there is nothing that you can do about it.
Veerappa Moily: It is not the question of us not being able to do anything. It’s just the reality. You must know what is happening in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. The difference between the general category and OBCs is not even 0.3 per cent. Sometimes, it’s even below 0.2 per cent.
The idea is not to degrade these institutions to enable the OBC students to get in. I want SC/ST students to go to an institution that has immense prestige. This is only in their interest.
Karan Thapar: Earlier you said that excellence is not to be disrupted. What it seems is that out of the three elements that you described as the moving spirit: expansion, inclusion and excellence, expansion and inclusion have been subordinated to excellence.
Veerappa Moily: I don’t want to compromise on excellence. While doing so, we don’t want to negotiate with the question of expansion. All the three can be built into the old fabric.
Karan Thapar: Whether we talk about staggering, exclusion of the Creamy Layer or the cut-off point. You could end up as an Oversight Committee making recommendations that could substantially dilute the government’s original commitment. That is the problem staring at people in the face. And it is because of this reason that Mr Mungekar and Mr Thorat are deeply concerned.
Veerappa Moily: But I must tell you that we are not going to negotiate on the implementation of the reservation policy.
Karan Thapar: But are you scared that given the thrust of your recommendations parties like the DMK, PMK maybe even the RJD, Ram Vilas Paswan’s Lok Janshakti Party could reject these proposals. Thay may turn around and say that Veerappa Moily has protected the excellence of the elite intuitions at the cost of the OBCs that remain excluded.
Veerappa Moily: No, that will not happen. I am very sure that I will be able to give such a recommendation that will have three objectives inclusion, expansion and excellence. I can guarantee that.
Karan Thapar: Thank you so much for talking to us.
Veerappa Moily: Thank you.
Karan Thapar: Mr Moily, let us start with the issue that is most in the news. Now that you have received the interim reports of all the five different sub-groups, do you believe it is possible to increase the intake by 54 per cent at one go next year? Or do you believe it needs to be staggered over a given period of time?
Veerappa Moily: These are the problems that are being posed by all the sub-groups. With the kind of mindset they are in, it is not possible to implement it at one go.
Karan Thapar: So what is your opinion as the Chairman of the Oversight Committee?
Veerappa Moily: I wanted to know the specific problems from them. They have sorted out most of the problems. I said as far as funding is concerned, it would be met. Also infrastructure, faculty and other requirements would be duly fulfilled. I have said time and again that we will go in for innovative methods.
Karan Thapar: You have just said that every one of the five sub-groups have asked for a period of time. Not one of them is in favour of implementing the increase and intake at one go. So when you ask the sub-groups that you want to know their problems, are you trying to persuade them into doing it in one go, or are you asking their problems so that it helps you agree with what they want? What is it?
Veerappa Moily: There is no question of ‘bulldozing’ the implementation of 54 per cent. We are clear about it. But at the same time, there are certain concerns and problems that need to be addressed. We have been more proactive on that. We said these are all the innovative methods. We have listed all the innovative methods, infrastructure needs, unprecedented flow of funds to be made available. With that, I would like them to examine, give the detailed project report. Thereafter, I would examine institution-wise and decide whether they can implement the reservation in one go or not.
Karan Thapar: So, what you are doing is that you saying to them “I will make the funds and the resources available. Think about your positions once again.” But if they come back in their final report and stick to what they have said in their interim report and you then discover that all five sub-groups still want a given period of time and none is in favour of implementing it immediately, then will you accept that phasing is inevitable?
Veerappa Moily: They may not come up with the same views. I know it because I have talked with a number of chairpersons of these institutions.
Karan Thapar: Let me quote to you what the Central Universities Group has said on page seven of its interim report. It says: “The expansion of capacity by 54 per cent in one spurt would neither be feasible nor desirable.”
Now, clearly a group that says “this kind of a change is neither feasible nor desirable” is not going to change its mind. They are most likely to stick to their position and remember the Central Universities are not asking for one or two years. But they want a period between three and five years.
Then let me add, Dr Samuel Paul, the head of the management group told The Times of India on July 29: “We have reached a conclusion that in the first year, the total expansion of the six Indian Institute of Management (IIMs) can only be 25 per cent.”
In its interim report, the management group has asked not for one or two years, but an unspecified period of time. How will you persuade these people that they do it in one go?
Veerappa Moily: I am not going to persuade. I am going to deliberate on them. That is why after I receive the final reports from all these groups by the 15th of this month; I have called a series of meetings with the individual institutions, the governing council chairpersons and the apex council chairpersons. I am going to discuss with them threadbare. I know the impossibilities.
Karan Thapar: I understand it’s always sensible to discuss things threadbare. But let me point out that the ‘year-wise phasing of expenditure’, which is an annexure in your own interim report, makes it clear that a total sum of Rs 16,653 crores that you have envisaged is in fact to be phased over five years, and only 25 per cent of that money is forthcoming in your plan.
So, your own financial planning suggests that in fact the ‘increase in intake’ will not take place in one go. It will be phased in over five years.
Veerappa Moily: That need not be connected with the ‘phasing-over’. That is the spreadover for the 11th ‘Five-Year Plan.’ Suppose they are capable of spending earlier, I don’t think the government will hesitate to release that kind of a funding.
Karan Thapar: If the government is capable of releasing the fund earlier, it may release it, but more to the point, if your sub-groups are not prepared to increase the in-take earlier, your planning gives them up to five years to do it depending upon what the final judgment is?
Veerappa Moily: That is correct.
Karan Thapar: Let me point out one more thing. Your interim report says, “Expansion, inclusion and excellence are the moving spirit behind the new reservation policy. If you don’t stagger the increase, you will either damage excellence or worst still, you may end up destroying it. That is why agreeing to the sub-groups and staggering, as they want, is essential.”
Veerappa Moily: Let me explain it like this. When we were small kids, we used to run after the kite so that we can capture the sky which we thought is beyond the hill. As we grew up we realised that the sky is much far away than we thought it really is.
The situation here is just like that. It is a question of mindset that one has. Once the mindset is changed, you can make way for alterations.
Karan Thapar: In the beginning of this interview, you seemed to suggest that you had an open mind about staggering, that you will try to persuade the sub-groups to change their position.
But if they don’t agree to it and still insist on sticking to their request for extra time, then you will agree to extra time and you will endorse that demand for staggering. That is still your position, isn’t it?
Veerappa Moily: No, there is a slight amendment. I do stand by that I have an open mind. Another point will be that with the kind proactive approach taken by the Oversight Committee or the government on the question of infrastructure, faculty and funding, it may be possible that these institutions may change their mind.
Karan Thapar: And what if they don’t their change their mind?
Veerappa Moily: I am not going to persuade. Because I want this expansion, inclusion and excellence -- all the three objectives -- laid down.
Karan Thapar: You have said a very important thing: you will not get them to change their mind. So, if they come back with their original position as expressed in the interim reports, then at that stage the Oversight Committee will accept that staggering is inevitable.
Veerappa Moily: There are two things -- one is taking the final report on the face value. Another point is the brainstorming session that I will have as an interaction. Critical examination of each and every problem posed by each of these institutions will be done. Thereafter, outside the Oversight Committee, I am going to invite on August 28-29 experts from all over the country to discuss as to what could be the course of action.
Karan Thapar: I understand all that. But suppose that at the end of that process, you find that the sub-groups have not changed their position? And I have quoted to you how emphatically they hold their views.
Suppose at the end of all your wider consultations, people also say to you, ‘staggering is sensible’, then at that stage, will you accept that staggering is ‘inevitable’?
Veerappa Moily: That is for the Oversight Committee to take a holistic approach. One thing I must tell you, we will have a holistic approach. The idea is to prepare a comprehensive roadmap to achieve the ultimate goal.
Karan Thapar: Let me point something else to you. Newspaper reports, in particular, in the Business Standard on the July 28 and August 3 are already saying that it is likely that you will split the 54 per cent overall increase into two slabs of 27 each. Which would be in fact 13.5 for the OBC (Other Backward Classes) and 13.5 for the protection of the other reserved categories split into two, and that you will do it in two stages and perhaps in two years.
You have not denied those reports and theses have been in the papers for at least a week to two weeks.
Veerappa Moily: As I have told you already, it is an open-ended decision. I will take this decision with the Oversight Committee only after I get the final report. That is why I am keeping my mind open, this side or that side -- both channels are open.
Karan Thapar: So when you say that your mind is open, it could go either way, isn’t it? It is at the moment 50-50 and could go either way?
Veerappa Moily: Depending upon the detailed project report submitted by each institution, it may vary from institution to institution. Some institutions may come forward and say with the kind of proposal, which is made by the Oversight Committee; we can go in one way. It is likely to happen. While some may say that it is impossible even if all the facilities are lined up. This may happen.
Karan Thapar: So, you will allow individual institutions to decide? Those that can do it at one go next year will do it. Whereas those who want extra time will be given the extra time if they are determined they need it. Is that correct?
Veerappa Moily: That is very correct.
Karan Thapar: Then let me put this to you. Many members of your Oversight committee, in particular Bhalchandra Mungekar (member of the Planning Commission) and Sukhadeo Thorat (Chairman, University Grants Commission) believe that the question of staggering is beyond the remit of the Oversight Committee.
They think that you are over-extending yourself by entertaining even the possibility of staggering the increase. What would you say to them?
Veerappa Moily: That is their personal opinion. I don’t think that personal opinions will have an influence over the entire committee. The Oversight Committee consists of many people and everybody’s views will be taken into consideration. But ultimately, the main theme of not disturbing the excellence will prevail above all these issues.
Karan Thapar: So, the main theme is to not disturb the excellence and everything else is subordinate.
Veerappa Moily: Yes, very much. Each thing is important because after all the expansion has to go ahead. But indeed ‘not disturbing the excellence’ is the main theme.
Karan Thapar: Let’s now turn to another contentious issue, which is how you deal with the so-called ‘Creamy Layer’? In employment, the ‘Creamy Layer’ of the OBCs is excluded from reservations. Should they be similarly excluded in terms of education?
Veerappa Moily: It is a debatable point and that is why I have not discussed it in the interim report and kept this question for the final report.
Karan Thapar: Your interim report says “the issue concerning the ‘Creamy Layer’ is being considered by the committee and a view will be taken in the final report.” What steps are you taking to consider it and how you are considering it?
Veerappa Moily: It is a question of design of implementation of the reservation order. There are two debates. One group says that so far as education is concerned ‘Creamy Layer’ should be included because you cannot capture the entire upper class. Another group says that if the ‘Creamy Layer’ is not included, then the people who are mighty and rich will lock away the entire lot of reservation.
Karan Thapar: Is this debate happening at the level of your Oversight Committee?
Veerappa Moily: Yes. This is at the level if the Oversight Committee and also it is being debated all over the country.
Karan Thapar: Is it within the remit of the Oversight Committee to consider whether the ‘Creamy Layer’ should be included or excluded? I ask you this because the terms of reference as laid out in your order of May 29, that set up the Oversight Committee, make no reference of it whatsoever.
Veerappa Moily: Not necessary. After all the policy of implementation is within the jurisdiction of the Oversight Committee. So, we are taking the design of implementation into consideration. The ‘Creamy Layer’ is one of the components of the implementation process.
Karan Thapar: So what you have done is that you have decided yourself that this subject is subsumed under your remit and you have the right to look at it.
Veerappa Moily: That’s correct.
Karan Thapar: The problem is that perhaps as many as five members of your Oversight Committee seem to disagree.
Bhalchandra Mungekar, Sukhadeo Thorat and at this instance I’m told that even Education Secretary Sudeep Banerjee and perhaps two other people -- making it a total of five --- believe that this is not a subject for the Oversight Committee to be looking into.
Veerappa Moily: It is for them to raise the issue and deliberate it in the Oversight Committee instead of voicing it in the press.
Karan Thapar: In other words, you are saying that if they have differences they should keep quiet about it, discuss it internally and not go public.
Veerappa Moily: They better do.
Karan Thapar: You recent them going public?
Veerappa Moily: It’s not appropriate. Just that.
Karan Thapar: You know, of course, that Bhalchandra Mungekar has actually written you a formal letter, disagreeing with your views and recording his dissent with your opinion that the final report will decide what happens to the ‘Creamy Layer’.
Veerappa Moily: I think keeping open any issue is not an offence. It can be taken up in the final meeting. Whatever views these members have they can raise it in the meeting.
Karan Thapar: So you are saying to the so-called ‘dissenting members’ that they should keep an open mind, don’t judge the issue in advance, let the debate happen first.
Veerappa Moily: I must be frank enough to tell you that there was no dissent. The opinion was consensus and total consensus in the interim report. I hope that a similar thing happens in the final report.
Karan Thapar: Some of these dissenting members claim that they were not shown the final draft of the interim report before it was sent.
Veerappa Moily: Once a report is approved by the committee, the usual practice is that it is not shown again to each and every member.
Karan Thapar: Let me raise a third issue that is becoming contentious. It is, in fact, your recommendation that the cut-off mark for OBCs in Central Universities should be somewhere mid-way between the cut-off marks for the SC/ST (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) and the unreserved category. Why is it not at the same level as the SC/STs? Why are you putting it mid-way i.e. higher?
Veerappa Moily: OBCs are not equivalent to SC/STs.
Karan Thapar: But many OBCs disagree. They say that the disadvantages they have suffered are the same.
Veerappa Moily: It’s not a question of agreeing or not agreeing. The Oversight Committee in its interim report has decided it.
Karan Thapar: But is the Oversight Committee united in deciding this or do they have differences that you have ‘papered over’?
Veerappa Moily: No. The Oversight Committee takes these decisions. They are united in deciding this.
Karan Thapar: Let me point out to you what could have been the problem with this particular decision that puts the marks mid-way in between.
In the case of the IIMs, IITs and AIIMS, in fact, what you have recommended is that the threshold for admission should be determined by the respective institutions alone commensurate with the level of excellence they enjoy. Which means that these institutions could chose to put the cut-off mark so high that it is only just below the unreserved category.
Veerappa Moily: Yes, they could do that. It is left to them because as it is, they do it. IITs, IIMs and AIIMS decide their own threshold marks between the SC/ST and the general (unreserved) category. Having said that, we are also giving back the decision only to them.
Karan Thapar: Because you have allowed the IITs, IIMs and AIIMS to fix their threshold mark as high as they want, add to that the recommendation of the management sub-groups which says: “there must be no unjustifiable demand on the institutes to lower the admission standards”, it means that if these groups set their standards or cut-off marks unreasonably high, you cannot put pressure upon them to bring it down.
Veerappa Moily: No, the interim report itself makes it very clear that the threshold mark will be fixed by the individual groups. We won’t put pressure on them to bring it down.
Karan Thapar: So, even if other people find their cut-offs unreasonably high, you still have to accept it.
Veerappa Moily: Let me be really frank with you. It is working really well. With regard to the SC/ST reservation, we have already asked these institutions to take their own stand.
Karan Thapar: Let me ask you a rather blunt question. Given the sort of terms and conditions for reservations that your interim group has accepted from IITs, IIMs and AIIMS, how many OBCs do you think would be able to benefit from reservations?
Because you have allowed these organizations to set the cut-off mark as they want, you have also given them the power to undermine OBC reservations as a result, that’s the problem.
Veerappa Moily: Just ground realities are available. For example the SC/ST threshold has been fixed. Do you think that SC/ST did not join at all?
Just now I got information from IITs that SC/ST are admitted in full at all the IITs.
Karan Thapar: But the difference between the SC/ST cut-off level and OBCs could be huge. Because the cut-off level for OBCs at the IITs, IIMs and AIIMS could be just below the unreserved category. In other words, it may be too high for most OBCs and you have accepted that there is nothing that you can do about it.
Veerappa Moily: It is not the question of us not being able to do anything. It’s just the reality. You must know what is happening in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. The difference between the general category and OBCs is not even 0.3 per cent. Sometimes, it’s even below 0.2 per cent.
The idea is not to degrade these institutions to enable the OBC students to get in. I want SC/ST students to go to an institution that has immense prestige. This is only in their interest.
Karan Thapar: Earlier you said that excellence is not to be disrupted. What it seems is that out of the three elements that you described as the moving spirit: expansion, inclusion and excellence, expansion and inclusion have been subordinated to excellence.
Veerappa Moily: I don’t want to compromise on excellence. While doing so, we don’t want to negotiate with the question of expansion. All the three can be built into the old fabric.
Karan Thapar: Whether we talk about staggering, exclusion of the Creamy Layer or the cut-off point. You could end up as an Oversight Committee making recommendations that could substantially dilute the government’s original commitment. That is the problem staring at people in the face. And it is because of this reason that Mr Mungekar and Mr Thorat are deeply concerned.
Veerappa Moily: But I must tell you that we are not going to negotiate on the implementation of the reservation policy.
Karan Thapar: But are you scared that given the thrust of your recommendations parties like the DMK, PMK maybe even the RJD, Ram Vilas Paswan’s Lok Janshakti Party could reject these proposals. Thay may turn around and say that Veerappa Moily has protected the excellence of the elite intuitions at the cost of the OBCs that remain excluded.
Veerappa Moily: No, that will not happen. I am very sure that I will be able to give such a recommendation that will have three objectives inclusion, expansion and excellence. I can guarantee that.
Karan Thapar: Thank you so much for talking to us.
Veerappa Moily: Thank you.