Quick Take
Summary is AI generated, newsroom reviewed.
On April 30, 2025, the Modi government announced caste data in the Census to aid affirmative action. Rahul Gandhi claimed credit for this decision, contrasting with his father’s opposition to implementation of Mandal Commission’s recommendations in 1990
New Delhi:
April 30, 2025: The Narendra Modi government says caste data will be part of the next Census and that the move will aid affirmative action to uplift the society’s backward sections. Shortly after, Congress MP and Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, claims credit for pushing the Centre into taking the decision.
September 6, 1990: The VP Singh-led National Front government had already decided to implement the recommendations of the Mandal Commission, introducing 27 per cent reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBCs), thereby taking the total reservation to 49.5 per cent. The move was vehemently opposed by Congress’s Rajiv Gandhi, former Prime Minister, then Leader of the Opposition and Rahul Gandhi’s father.
As the ruling BJP and the Opposition Congress fight for credit on the caste census, here is a look at how the Grand Old Party responded to the Mandal Commission’s report 35 years back and the grounds on which it opposed the move.
A Kashmir Parallel
The Narendra Modi government’s decision to include caste data in the Census comes days after a heinous terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir’s Pahalgam that left 25 tourists and a Kashmiri pony ride operator dead. Tensions between India and Pakistan are at an all-time high and the clock is ticking for a response to the terror strike that has shocked the nation.
Interestingly, the 1990 decision of the VP Singh government also had a Kashmir backdrop. Militancy was at its peak in the Valley and the first few months of 1990 had seen the killing of several Kashmiri Hindus, leading to an exodus of the minority community. VP Singh was under pressure over the situation in Kashmir and the forced migration of Kashmiri Pandits, which would snowball into a major political issue decades later.
The Mandal Commission
The Mandal Commission was formed in 1978 after the Janata Party dealt a crushing victory to the Indira Gandhi-led Congress in the years following the Emergency. The mandate of this commission headed by BP Mandal was to identify socially or educationally backward classes. The report was submitted in 1980; by then, the Janata Party was out of power and Mrs Gandhi had returned as Prime Minister. The next decade saw key national developments, including the separatist movement in Punjab, Operation Bluestar in which the Indian Army stormed the Golden Temple in Amritsar and Mrs Gandhi’s subsequent assassination by her security staff.
Following her death, her older son, Rajiv Gandhi, became Prime Minister with a massive mandate, but there was no movement on the Mandal Commission report. In the 1989 Lok Sabha election, the Rajiv Gandhi-led Congress was routed and VP Singh became Prime Minister with the support of the Left and the BJP. In 1990, VP Singh implemented the Mandal Commission’s recommendations, raising a political storm in the country.
Mandal Commission’s Recommendations and Implementation
The Mandal Commission recommended a 27 per cent reservation for OBCs in government services and technical and professional institutions in the Centre and the states. In 1990, the VP Singh government implemented the quota in government jobs, triggering nationwide protests. A Delhi University student, Rajiv Goswami, self-immolated on September 19, 1990, to protest the government’s move and became the face of the agitation against reservation. He suffered 70 per cent burns and died of health issues a decade later.
Sixteen years later, the Congress-led UPA government took another step towards implementing the Mandal Commission report and reserved 27 per cent seats in higher education institutions, including AIIMS, IITs and IIMs, for OBCs. This move, too, sparked massive protests by the so-called upper castes who said the government’s move discarded meritocracy and was driven by vote-bank politics.
The BJP, then in the Opposition, supported the reservations but argued that benefits of reservation must also be extended to economically weaker sections of so-called forward castes and also stressed the exclusion of the “creamy layer” — those relatively privileged within backward sections.
Rajiv Gandhi’s 1990 Speech In Lok Sabha
Rajiv Gandhi’s address in Lok Sabha on September 6, 1990, as recorded in Parliament records, questioned the timing of the government’s decision to implement the Mandal Commission’s report. “This is a time when the nation is going through a number of very serious, perhaps even severe problems. The situation in Kashmir is worse than it has ever been since independence. The situation in Punjab is again perhaps worse than it has ever been. Assam has joined that list. Tamil Nadu is drawing very close to that. In fact, the Prime Minister, if I remember correctly, speaking in this very House, had asked the nation to be prepared for war… Then, apart from that, we already have North-South tension brewing on the question of language…,” he said.
The parallels between the backdrop then and now are baffling. While Kashmir is tense after a period of relative calm, the Centre is locked in a language row with southern states.
“Ground Not Prepared”
Rajiv Gandhi said the “ground has not been prepared” for the big move. “…the proof that the ground has not been prepared is that the people are getting killed outside, buses are getting burnt, trains are getting burnt and buildings are being destroyed. That is the proof.”
He said that on one hand, the Prime Minister was asking the nation to be psychologically prepared for war, and on the other, “he is causing a rift in our society”.
On the government’s move to implement reservation, he said, “The fact is that you need a comprehensive plan. You need a comprehensive vision, you cannot look at these things in an isolated manner. We, the Congress, are in favour of a comprehensive action plan, an affirmative action plan for the backward communities. We need that. The problem cannot be solved by playing politics or by limited politically motivated manipulations,” he said.
Rajiv Gandhi’s Creamy Layer Argument
Mr Gandhi said that the government must accept that there are people who are from a socially and educationally backward group, but “under no circumstances they can be described as socially and educationally backward”.
“I will give an example. Supposing we have a person who has been a Supreme Court judge for a number of years, say 10 or 15 years and then joins politics and becomes a Cabinet Minister, is he socially backward? Is he educationally backward? Do his children need help?”
When an MP asked how many such people were there, Rajiv Gandhi replied, “I am not saying how many. Even if there is one, that assistance should go to somebody else rather than to him. This is the point. For example, do we want the benefit that the government is giving to be cornered by the Ministers or the sons of Ministers? Do we want the benefits that are being given by the government to be cornered by big landlords and people who have a lot of property?”
The Minority Question
In his Lok Sabha address, Rajiv Gandhi had questioned why the government had not aimed to extend reservation benefits to backward sections in the minority communities. “Sir, it should go not only to such underprivileged groups and many others like them, but to people from all religions who are underprivileged and this is where I have a grave difference with what the government is bringing in. They are looking almost entirely at caste.”
“If you look at the Muslims, the vast majority of the Muslim community in India is backward, educationally, socially, economically everywhere. The same thing is true for Christians. The same thing is true even for Sikhs who are by and large okay, but there are still groups who are not all right. It is true for almost every religion as groups who are socially and educationally backward. Why should they not be included? The government must explain this; the country wants to know,” he said.
The “Casteless Society” Argument
Rajiv Gandhi said that implementing reservation would put caste back into Indian society. “Do we still have that goal of a casteless society? … If you believe in a casteless society, every major step you take, must be such that you move towards a casteless society. And you must avoid taking any step which takes you towards a caste-ridden society. Unfortunately, the step that we are taking today, the manner in which it has been put, is a casteist formula. While accepting that caste is a reality, we must dilute that formula and break that formula by adding something on to it. So that at least we start inching away from the casteist formula. This is where I feel that the Leftists are not carrying out their responsibility. And you should do that. It is within your powers to do it, it is not within our powers to do it,” he said, addressing the Prime Minister.
At one point, taking a swipe at VP Singh’s erstwhile royal roots, Mr Gandhi said, “Sir, Raja Sahib is putting the caste into our society, once again. He is ensuring that caste does not go out by this action… this Government is creating a vested interest in casteism and the country is going to pay a very heavy price for this,” he said.
Rajiv Gandhi demanded that the government must bring socially and educationally backward classes from other castes within the Hindu religion under the purview of reservation and also bring backward sections from other religions under it.
How VP Singh Replied
In his response to Rajiv Gandhi’s creamy layer argument, then Prime Minister VP Singh said that the issue in question is about socially and economically backward classes, not individuals. “When a class moves up, then, of course, weaning out can be there. But when the whole class is under just zero and one per cent, that is not the issue. The issue is whether the whole class has gone up or not. That is the issue.”
The then Prime Minister also quoted Jawaharlal Nehru and said, “He (Nehru) says that half a dozen or may be ten so-called superior castes dominate the Indian scene among the Hindus… There is no doubt about it. And if I talk about removal of casteism, do not understand that I want to perpetuate the present classification as some people at the top and other people at the bottom.”
To this, Rajiv Gandhi replied, “Does the Prime Minister believe in a casteless society or not? I do not want to know what Panditji believed in.”
The Many Twists and Turns Between Rajiv and Rahul
Between Rajiv Gandhi’s dogged opposition to the VP Singh government’s decision to implement reservation and his son Rahul Gandhi claiming credit for the caste Census move, much water has flowed through the Ganges. At the time, the BJP was a part of the ruling coalition with 83 members. The Congress, despite being in the opposition, was the single largest party after the 1989 Lok Sabha election. The story is different now. The BJP, despite suffering a setback in the Lok Sabha polls last year, is in its third consecutive term. The Congress, which had been reduced to its all-time low of 44 seats in the 2019 general election, posted a recovery last year and now holds 99 seats. Major players in the caste political landscape, such as Akhilesh Yadav’s Samajwadi Party and Lalu Yadav’s Rastriya Janata Dal, are now Congress’s allies.
The BJP, too, has grown adept at cracking the caste arithmetic in polls and reaped benefits. Interestingly, the BJP, a section of which had once pushed for a creamy layer classification, has now backtracked. Following a Supreme Court judgment last year in which Justice BR Gavai — soon to take over as Chief Justice of India — recommended a policy to identify the creamy layer, the government had made it clear that it had no such plan.
With Bihar polls approaching, the BJP’s move aims to turn the tables on the Opposition — RJD and Congress. The Congress, on the other hand, calls the announcement as its victory and insists that Rahul Gandhi forced the government’s hand. But between 1990 and 2025, as party stands and ideological positions are swapped, it is less about ideology and more about pragmatism.