The Hidden Inequality in India's Reservation System: Why OBCs Face the Toughest Competition

 India's reservation system is often painted in binaries: reserved vs. unreserved, merit vs. quota. But the true picture is far more complex—and far more unfair to the very communities reservations are meant to uplift.

Recent data from the Karnataka caste survey—the most detailed since the 1931 British census—reveals something shocking: the Other Backward Classes (OBCs), despite being the largest social group, are vastly underrepresented in the actual seats reserved for them.

---

🔍 The Numbers: What the Karnataka Caste Survey Revealed

The Socio-Economic and Educational Survey (2015), submitted in 2023 by the Karnataka State Commission for Backward Classes, estimated the population composition of the state as:

This means OBCs alone form the overwhelming majority of Karnataka’s population.

---

🎯 But What About Seat Allocation?

Let’s look at how government jobs and education seats are allocated in Karnataka:

The Real Shock: Seat-to-Population Ratio

By comparing each group's share of seats with their share of population, we get the seat-per-capita ratio—a clear indicator of how much competition a member of that category faces.

This means:

• General category candidates have almost 7× more seats per capita than their population share. Their competition is the lowest.

• OBCs, despite being the largest group, have less than half the seats they proportionally deserve.

• SC/ST categories, while historically disadvantaged, now receive seats roughly in proportion to their population.

---

🧠 What Does This Really Mean?

It means OBCs are fighting for crumbs on their own table. A student or job aspirant from an OBC background faces nearly double the competition as an SC/ST counterpart—and more than 13× the competition faced by someone from an unreserved (General) caste.

And yet, public discourse often portrays OBCs as having an “easy ride” due to reservations. The numbers say otherwise.

---

❓ Why Is This Happening?

1. Cap on total reservation: The Supreme Court has historically capped reservations at 50% (though Karnataka exceeds this), meaning even large groups like OBCs can’t get proportional seats.

2. No proportional quotas: Reservations aren’t based on current caste population data (except in Tamil Nadu and now Bihar).

3. General category advantages: The General category, which includes dominant castes, ends up with a disproportionate share despite being numerically tiny.

---

🔁 What Needs to Change?

• Make caste census data public across India

• Base reservation percentages on actual population share

• Sub-categorize OBCs so that dominant OBCs don’t crowd out marginalized ones

• Include seat-to-population ratio in policy-making

---

⚖️ Final Thought

The reservation debate often turns emotional, but data helps us see clearly. And the data is unambiguous:

The biggest victims of India’s flawed reservation system are often those it claims to empower: the OBCs.

It’s time to recalibrate the system—not against one group, but in favor of justice, logic, and equality.

The Caste Divide in Bangalore’s IT Sector: What the Data Tells Us

 In the sleek glass towers of Bangalore—the Silicon Valley of India—the conversation around meritocracy often takes center stage. The IT industry prides itself on being a level playing field, where skills matter more than surnames. But recent and historic data tell a different story, one rooted in centuries of structural inequality.

Who Really Works in Bangalore's IT Sector?

A 2007 study by anthropologist Carol Upadhya revealed that over 70% of IT employees in Bangalore belong to upper caste backgrounds. These include Brahmins, Baniyas, and other forward castes historically privileged in Indian society.

Another report by DNA India (2006) found that 86% of employees in India’s IT and ITES sectors are from upper castes, with Brahmins alone accounting for a disproportionately large chunk of the workforce. This finding was based on industry surveys and internal assessments.

"The industry, it seems, is still dominated by people who have had historical access to English education, elite institutions, and urban networks." — Carol Upadhya

But Who Makes Up Karnataka’s Population?

Compare that with the findings of the Karnataka caste census (2024), and the contrast is staggering.

According to the survey:

• Other Backward Classes (OBCs): 70%

• Scheduled Castes (SCs): 18%

• Scheduled Tribes (STs): 7%

• Muslims: 13%

• Upper castes (including Brahmins, Lingayats, Vokkaligas, etc.): far less than 15%

The data reveals that the overwhelming majority of Karnataka's population comes from historically marginalized communities, yet these groups are massively underrepresented in the IT industry.

Why This Disparity Exists

Several systemic factors drive this divide:

• Access to English-medium education and elite engineering colleges remains skewed towards upper castes.

• Urban networks, referrals, and “soft skills” (coded language, accent, behavior) often gatekeep hiring.

• Major tech companies recruit heavily from the IITs, NITs, and private institutions like BITS Pilani—where marginalized communities are underrepresented due to cost and access barriers.

The Illusion of Meritocracy

The myth that the IT sector is caste-neutral falls apart when you examine recruitment patterns, leadership demographics, and access to opportunity.

The upper caste dominance in tech isn’t just a coincidence—it’s a byproduct of centuries of systemic privilege. If we truly want to build an inclusive digital India, we need to confront this reality, not hide behind the façade of "merit."

What Needs to Change

• Caste-disaggregated diversity data in tech must be made public.

• Companies should set diversity hiring goals that include caste as a metric, not just gender.

• Reservation in private sector jobs—long resisted—needs serious policy discussion.

Conclusion

India cannot build a digital future on the foundations of social exclusion. As tech becomes the backbone of the Indian economy, ensuring caste equity in its workforce is not just a moral imperative—it’s a democratic one.

The numbers don’t lie. The question is: are we willing to act on them?