Rohini Commission

Also called: Commission to examine sub-categorisation of OBCs · Topic: Safeguards for Vulnerable Sections: SCs, STs, OBCs, Minorities, Women and Children · NCERT: Beyond NCERT

Meaning

The Rohini Commission is a commission set up by the President under Article 340 on 2 October 2017, chaired by Justice G. Rohini. Its job was to study how to sub-categorise the OBCs in the central OBC list, which means splitting them into smaller groups so that the more backward castes also get a fair share of the 27% quota [1][2]. It matters because a few stronger OBC castes take most of the benefits. The commission was asked to find a fair and scientific way to share them out.

Explanation

Why it was needed

• Sub-categorisation means dividing the OBC quota into smaller groups.
• The more backward castes in the OBC list get a fixed share of their own.

• The stronger (dominant) OBC castes cannot then take the whole quota.

• The problem it addresses: a few castes get most of the benefits.

• A 2018 analysis looked at central government jobs and admissions to central universities.
• About one-quarter of the castes in the central OBC list had taken about 97% of the jobs and seats.
• Nearly a thousand castes had got nothing (these figures should be checked before use).

Terms of reference (what it was asked to do)

The commission had three tasks [1]:

1. Study how unevenly reservation benefits are shared among the castes in the central OBC list.
2. Work out a scientific method, with clear criteria and norms, for sub-categorisation.
3. Correct repetitions, unclear entries, contradictions and spelling or copying errors in the central list.

Set-up and timeline

• Who set it up: the President, under Art. 340, by notification of 2 October 2017 [1][2].
• Chair: Justice G. Rohini, retired Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court [1][2].
• Extensions: its term was extended 14 times [1].
• Report: given to the President on 31 July 2023 [1].
• Status: the report has not been made public.

Limits

• It covers only the central OBC list. That list is used for the Union's own jobs and institutions. State OBC lists are outside its scope.
• It can only advise. An Art. 340 commission studies the issue and makes recommendations. The government decides whether to act on them.
• It has little data to work with. The Census counts only SCs and STs, not OBCs, so any split has to rely on surveys, old figures or data on who has received benefits.

In the Constitution and practice

• Constitutional basis: Art. 340
• Art. 340(1): the President may appoint a commission to study the conditions of socially and educationally backward classes (SEBCs), the problems they face and the steps the Union or the states should take to help them. SEBC is the Constitution's own term for OBCs.

• Art. 340(2)–(3): the commission reports to the President. The President places the report before each House of Parliament, together with a note on the action taken.

• The third commission under Art. 340. The three are Kalelkar (1953), Mandal (1979) and Rohini (2017) [2].

• Kalelkar (report 1955): listed 2,399 backward castes. The Union rejected the report.
• Mandal (report 1980): identified 3,743 castes and recommended 27% reservation for OBCs. This was put in place by the DoPT Office Memorandum (an executive order issued by a ministry) of 13 August 1990. It was upheld in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992).

• Rohini: does not decide who is an OBC or how big the quota is. It deals with how the existing 27% is shared among OBC castes.

• States already do this.

• Bihar splits OBCs into Extremely Backward Classes (EBC) and Backward Classes (BC).

• Andhra Pradesh and Telangana use BC groups A, B, C, D (and E).

• Connected developments

• 105th Constitutional Amendment Act 2021: states and UTs can make their own SEBC lists. The central list is only for the Union's own purposes [3]. So the Rohini exercise affects only central jobs and central institutions.
• SC sub-classification judgment (2024): raised the same question of fairness inside a reserved group, this time for Scheduled Castes.

Don't confuse with

• Mandal Commission (1979): Mandal created the case for OBC reservation and recommended the 27% quota. Rohini (2017) deals with dividing that 27% among OBC castes.
• Creamy layer: this removes better-off families from the OBC quota on the basis of the parents' post or income (DoPT OM of 8 September 1993). Sub-categorisation removes no one. It divides the quota among castes by how backward they are.
• NCBC (Art. 338B): the National Commission for Backward Classes is a permanent constitutional body, created by the 102nd Amendment 2018 [4]. The Rohini Commission was a temporary commission under Art. 340 for one task.
• SC sub-classification (2024): this concerns Scheduled Castes and came from a court judgment. Rohini concerns the central OBC list and is an executive commission appointed by the President.

Prelims Hooks

• Art. 340 → the President appoints a backward classes commission. Kalelkar (1953), Mandal (1979) and Rohini (2017) were all set up under it [2].
• Rohini Commission → notified 2 October 2017. Chaired by Justice G. Rohini, retired Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court [1][2].
• Report → given to the President on 31 July 2023 after 14 extensions [1]. It has not been made public.
• Scope trap: its terms of reference cover only the central OBC list, not state lists. One of its tasks was to correct errors and repetitions in that list [1].
• Body trap: the Rohini Commission is not a constitutional body. The NCBC got constitutional status under Art. 338B through the 102nd Amendment 2018 [4].
• 2018 data: about one-quarter of central-list OBC castes took about 97% of central jobs and seats.

Mains Points

• Fairness within the OBC quota:
• The Rohini data shows that dominant OBC castes take most of the benefits, while nearly a thousand castes have got nothing.

• Sub-categorisation would spread benefits more evenly and move the quota closer to real equality of opportunity.

• Weak data and transparency:

• Without an OBC count in the Census, any sub-groups depend on limited data and can be challenged.

• Art. 340(3) expects the report and an action-taken note to go before Parliament. But the report is still not public, so there is no open debate and no decision.

• Federal and political angle:

• Bihar, Andhra Pradesh and Telangana have already sub-categorised their OBCs. They are working models for the Centre.
• After the 105th Amendment, central and state lists can differ [3]. Any central sub-categorisation will apply only to Union jobs and institutions. It may also face resistance from dominant OBC groups.

Related concepts

• Backward Classes Commission (Article 340)
• Kalelkar Commission
• Other Backward Classes
• OBC reservation
• Ashoka Kumar Thakur case
• Creamy layer
• 102nd Constitutional Amendment Act 2018
• 105th Constitutional Amendment Act 2021

Read more

• Other Backward Classes: commissions, creamy layer, NCBC and sub-categorisation