Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Indian Muslims: Varieties of Discriminations and What Affirmative Action Can Do

  • Living reference work entry
  • Latest version View entry history
  • First Online:
Handbook on Economics of Discrimination and Affirmative Action

Abstract

Social inequalities are found to have risen in India. Religion is one such axis of inequality. Muslims – the largest minority in India – is its first victim. The Sachar Committee Report (SCR) submitted in 2006 showed that Muslims were on the margins in terms of political, economic, and social indicators and that their average condition was comparable to, or even worse than, the country’s backward communities including Dalits in certain indicators. The condition of Muslims since then has only worsened in the context of Hindu majoritarianism. However, Muslims are differentiated by region. They still fare better in development indicators in South India vis-à-vis the rest of India. This is partly due to the implementation of affirmative action schemes for Muslims in the South: Muslims do better where they are given reservation and lost to others including SCs and OBCs where they are excluded from positive discrimination framework. In South India, policies of affirmative action work better where they are supported by complementary politics and policies. The case of Indian Muslims enables us to engage with the prevalent contention around religion being the basis for affirmative action, whereas class, caste, and gender have assumed to be the only legitimate claimants.

The authors are grateful to the Henry Luce Foundation whose funding has made this research possible, as part of the “Indian Muslims Today” project.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    For a brief overview of the rise of inequalities in post-1991 India, see Jaffrelot and Kalaiyarasan (2021).

  2. 2.

    The Indian Human Development Survey (IHDS) was done by the National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER) in collaboration with the University of Maryland. This paper uses both the rounds, i.e., the IHDS I done in 2004–2005 and IHDS II done in 2011–2012. It is a nationally representative, multi-topic survey of 42,152 households done in 1,503 villages and 971 urban neighborhoods across India. IHDS II reinterviewed about 83% of the IHDS I households plus any split households that resided in the same community.

  3. 3.

    The sample is identical for 2004–2005. However, a small percentage of households which got split (e.g., a family becoming into two after marriage, fragmented for other reasons) in 2011–2012 are not available for 2004–2005. Yet, the parental households are retained. The actual sample of HHs available for all India in 2004–2005 is 34,643.

  4. 4.

    The recent study by Sam Asher et al. (2020) shows that upward educational mobility of SCs is exactly offset by the fall of Muslims in India, while Hindu upper castes and OBCs remain constant.

  5. 5.

    We constructed this ratio using the NSSO PLFS data for those reported as employed in government and public sectors in 2017–2018.

  6. 6.

    In 1981, they were 2.98% among a total of 3883 IAS officers, while in 2000, they were marginally less at 2.83% (Hasan 2006).

  7. 7.

    Paragraph 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, states “Notwithstanding anything contained in paragraph 2, no person who professes a religion different from the Hindu, the Sikh or the Buddhist religion shall be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste.” While this order was amended to include Dalit Sikhs in 1956 and Dalit Buddhists in the 1990s, it continues to exclude Muslims and Christians.

  8. 8.

    For instance, All Bengal Minority Youth Federation made complaints to the state minority affairs in West Bengal that the state list of OBC Muslims was not accepted by the union government. For details, see

    https://www.hindustantimes.com/india/wb-muslim-group-unhappy-over-obc-quota/story-AZ8ZbdZXPaIe3IqHXNprsN.html.

  9. 9.

    See the Report p. 149 (16.1.6).

  10. 10.

    The Sachar Committee has also argued that it would be most appropriate for them to be included under the SC category or at least clubbed with the most backward caste (MBC) category (pg. 198).

  11. 11.

    The order provided five percent reservations for STs and 12.5% for SCs but excluded Dalit Muslims and Dalit Christians in 1950. The reservation was also increased to 7.5% for STs and 15% for SCs in the 1970s.

  12. 12.

    p. 153 para. 16.2.16 of the report

  13. 13.

    p. 150 para. 16.2.7 of the report

  14. 14.

    There are contested opinions within Muslims on reservation question. One, as argued by Ashfaq Husain Ansari (2004), reservation for Muslims should not be conflated with reservation for OBC Muslims as the latter are legitimately entitled to. On the other hand, Syed Shahabuddin (2004), for instance, argues that Muslims in entirety are eligible for quota proportion to their population and the problems of social backwardness of certain Muslims can be dealt with internally on a preferential basis.

  15. 15.

    The SCR argued that either it would be most appropriate to include them under the SC category or at least clubbed with the most backward castes (p. 198).

  16. 16.

    The committee was asked to examine and determine the structure of an equal opportunity commission to ensure the full equality of opportunities for SCs, STs, OBCs, and religious minorities. For more details, see Madhava Menon (2008).

  17. 17.

    For her interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-V7Xeyrkq7M

  18. 18.

    For instance, Dr. Natesan of the Justice Party argued that the motion had to be reframed as “non-Brahmin Indians” and went on to claim that non-Brahmins include Muslims. There was even idea of Dravidian Islam among Tamil-speaking Muslims (Anwar 2018).

  19. 19.

    The decision in State of Madras vs Champakam Dorairajan is a landmark case in which the Supreme Court upheld a High Court judgment striking down a government order providing caste-based reservation in government jobs and college seats (Kalaiyarasan and Vijayabaskar 2021).

  20. 20.

    In 2007, the Tamil Nadu Backward Class Christians and Backward Class Muslims (Reservation of Seats in Educational Institutions Including Private Educational Institutions and of Appointments or Posts in the Services Under the State) Act was legislated to create a subdivision of backward Muslims and Christians.

  21. 21.

    The West Bengal State Higher Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admissions) Rules was enacted in 2013 mandating the reservation of 17% for OBCs including Muslims, adding to the SC 22% and ST 6%. For detail, see

    https://wbhed.gov.in/readwrite/uploads/Reservation_Rules.pdf (accessed on 12 January 2021).

  22. 22.

    The Minister of Minority Affairs of BJP termed the abovementioned interventions as “only appeasement of minorities and zero empowerment,” so he put forward a shift in policy toward Muslims as “empowerment without appeasement” (https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/there-was-only-appeasement-of-minorities-and-zero-empowerment-in-last-60-years-n/306060).

  23. 23.

    In 2019 the Modi government has introduced a 10% quota for the Economically Weaker Sections, the upper caste poor.

  24. 24.

    For instance, Hilal Ahmed (2008) argues the politics of Muslims has moved beyond protection of Urdu, minority character of Aligarh Muslim University, protection of Muslim Personal Law, and the protection of Wakf, demanding socioeconomic rights including reservation in certain states. For details, see https://www.india-seminar.com/2008/586/586_hilal_ahmed.htm.

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CERI-Sciences Po/CNRS, Paris, France

    Christophe Jaffrelot

  2. King’s India Institute, King’s College, London, UK

    Christophe Jaffrelot

  3. Brown University, Providence, RI, USA

    Kalaiyarasan A.

Authors
  1. Christophe Jaffrelot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kalaiyarasan A.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christophe Jaffrelot .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi, New Delhi, India

    Ashwini Deshpande

Appendix

Appendix

Basic statistics

Major states

Muslim population as per Census 2011 (in %)

Share in total Muslims in India (%)

Muslim population as per Census

Total sampled persons

Total sampled HHs

Sampled Muslim persons

Sampled Muslim HHs

J&K

68.3

5.0

8,567,485

3,211

696

2,097

382

Assam

34.2

6.2

10,679,345

2,417

756

844

252

West Bengal

27.0

14.3

24,654,825

8,285

2,391

2,003

555

Kerala

26.6

5.2

8,873,472

5,333

1,560

1,234

329

Uttar Pradesh

19.3

22.3

38,483,967

15,868

3,732

3,807

845

Bihar

16.9

10.2

17,557,809

6,199

1,526

1,070

244

Delhi

12.9

1.3

2,158,684

1,946

489

271

59

Karnataka

12.9

4.6

7,893,065

12,807

3,537

1,584

388

Maharashtra

11.5

7.5

12,971,152

12,808

3,265

825

180

Gujarat

9.7

3.4

5,846,761

6,704

1,724

610

158

Andhra Pradesh

9.6

4.7

8,082,412

6,467

1,975

494

135

Rajasthan

9.1

3.6

6,215,377

10,560

2,668

1452

325

Haryana

7.0

1.0

1,781,342

7,072

1,755

525

121

MP

6.6

2.8

4,774,695

11,451

3,093

633

167

Tamil Nadu

5.9

2.5

4,229,479

5,970

1,888

294

85

All India

14.2

100.0

172,245,158

150,988

40,018

19,169

4,562

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Jaffrelot, C., A., K. (2023). Indian Muslims: Varieties of Discriminations and What Affirmative Action Can Do. In: Deshpande, A. (eds) Handbook on Economics of Discrimination and Affirmative Action. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4016-9_26-3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4016-9_26-3

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-33-4016-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-33-4016-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Economics and FinanceReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Chapter history

  1. Latest

    Indian Muslims: Varieties of Discriminations and What Affirmative Action Can Do
    Published:
    29 April 2023

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4016-9_26-3

  2. Indian Muslims: Varieties of Discriminations and What Affirmative Action Can Do
    Published:
    21 April 2023

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4016-9_26-2

  3. Original

    India (Muslims)
    Published:
    08 December 2022

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4016-9_26-1

Search

Navigation