| The Lok Sabha today passed the 104th Constitutional Amendment Bill which will allow the government to impose a quota for scheduled castes and tribes in private educational institutions.
|
| |
| The Bill, introduced by Human Resource Development Minister Arjun Singh, was drafted after a broad consensus among the political parties. The Supreme Court had ruled that the existing constitutional provisions did not allow the government to impose quotas in private colleges.
|
| |
| “The Bill is about social justice,” said Singh, while initiating debate on the Bill.
|
| |
| The main opposition to the Bill came from the BJP, which introduced an amendment seeking that minority institutions should not be excluded from the purview of the Bill.
|
| |
| Party leader Ananth Kumar said, “Article 30 says that there should be equal treatment of all communities. The UPA government has betrayed the minority community in the name of providing social justice. It will create another conflict.”
|
| |
| BJP leader Maneka Gandhi said some of the best educational institutes were run by Christian missionaries and the Bill was in effect depriving SC/ST students access to these institutions.
|
| |
| “Thus, they will have the right to enter second best institutions but not the best,” she said.
|
| |
| Mohan Singh (SP), Devendra Prasad Yadav (RJD) and Dr Ramadoss (PMK) sought reservations for the other backward castes (OBCs).
|
| |
| Suresh Kurup (CPI-M) and RL Jalappa (Congress)insisted that the fee structure of private institutions should be regulated, or some mechanism be evolved to make it possible for poor SC/ST students pay tuition fees in colleges.
|
| |
| “Anyone concerned about the future of students should look at not just admissions but at the fee structure at these institutions,” said Kurup.
|
| |
| Jalappa, who runs several institutes of higher learning in Karnataka, said the Centre should evolve these norms since the sector’s experience state governments had not been very good.
|
| |
| The voting saw 381 members present in the House, with 379 voting in favour of the motion, one member voting against and one abstaining. |
| |
|
| |
Content Guide
