Reservation vs Meritocracy: Battle of Principals

Meritocracy is imperative for the evolution of any free society. Meritocracy is a natural disposition of hierarchy in a community that rewards people exclusively on their ability. Due to its intrinsic qualities, meritocracy is always encouraged and promoted. 

It is strictly based on the idea of equal treatment that is free from any prejudice and favouritism. In practical terms, meritocracy is predicated on equality of opportunity and refusal of discrimination based on factors related to gender, class, caste, religion, place, etc.

On the other hand, proponents of reservations strictly refuse to overlook the factors of discrimination mentioned above. According to them, an individual's background is critical for determining his/her merit in a society that has voluntarily or involuntarily favoured one group over the other. This favouritism that has played out in the community for a significant time period has even contaminated the system at the policy level.  So even if meritocracy is made the law of the land, the contaminated system will unconsciously or consciously favour the "privileged" class over the other. Therefore, these underprivileged groups deserve special provisions to have an equal opportunity in the first place.

While the degree of contamination and level of discrimination will vary from society to society, there is absolutely no doubt that certain sections of society benefit more than others. And that this privilege that they enjoy might even be arbitrarily at the expense of the underprivileged. But the state's monotonous treatment of an entire group of the population remains a bone of contention for reservation. There are clearly cases where individuals have unduly benefited from the reservation, and the number of such cases is rising. 

On the other hand, reservation is not a matter to be rejected in its entirety. Reservation based on economic condition is principally completely justified at the individual level. Access to better resources and facilities certainly play a huge factor in an individual's upbringing, making it a privilege to be born in a wealthy household. 

Reservation cannot be justified when it unscrupulously bestows benefits on people, even when they don't need it. But still, somehow, deserve it just because of an arbitrary link to a community. 

In India, the caste-based reservation has been severly criticized for its brazen loopholes that serve gross injustice to individuals for no fault of their own. Also, continuing to serve the perks of reservation to an already wealthy class's entailing generations makes it much worse.

There can be no justification for granting a job seat to a "rich Dalit" IAS officer's son/daughter instead of a more talented "poor Brahmin." Reservation has undoubtedly been a force for good in a country like India, but after more than 70 years of independence, we must not shy away from asking serious questions regarding its veracity.