Haryana’s decision to bring in a law to reserve of 75% of private-sector jobs with a salary cap of ₹50,000 monthly for locals contradicts the “one nation, one people” stance of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the ideological fount of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), said an RSS functionary, familiar with the organisation’s thinking on the matter.
The Sangh’s position assumes importance given that it is a BJP-led government, which has brought in the legislation.
The RSS functionary blamed political expediency for the move even as the BJP-Jannayak Janta Party government, which faces a no-confidence motion on Wednesday, has called it a fulfilment of a key election promise.
“You cannot stop the migration of people for jobs. Such decisions have a fallout. Take the example of Bihar, where the ban on consumption of alcohol has not been effective on the ground. A similar experiment was done in Haryana by Bansi Lal when he banned alcohol [consumption] but the results on the ground showed that illegal liquor stores had sprung up all across the state,” said the RSS functionary, referring to the 1996 prohibition that was rolled back two years later under public pressure.
The functionary pointed out Haryana would end up losing revenue if the decision is not revoked. “Companies will find a way around the law, but it is the state that will lose revenue.”
{{/usCountry}}The functionary pointed out Haryana would end up losing revenue if the decision is not revoked. “Companies will find a way around the law, but it is the state that will lose revenue.”
{{/usCountry}}Also Read | Is Haryana’s new reservation law constitutionally tenable?
BJP leaders refused to comment on the Sangh functionary’s view, but on the merit of the issue, a BJP leader cited similar moves in other states and added they can be viewed as affirmative steps. “There are provisions in the law that give the state powers to take steps for positive discrimination in favour of those who are deprived or neglected. In several states, reservation for local residents in the private sector has been announced,” the leader said, requesting anonymity. He was referring to the laws in Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, and Madhya Pradesh, which have been challenged in court.
Legal experts, however, believe that the law will find it hard to meet the constitutional test of equality and non discrimination.
A second BJP leader acknowledged queries from industrialists and manufacturers on how the policy will be implemented on the ground. “There are some concerns, especially now that Haryana is seen as an industrial production destination. There are fears that the workforce needed will not be available. But the government has assured that it will address concerns,” said the second leader, who did not want to be named. The leader added a large percentage of those employed in the salary band of under ₹50,000 are migrant workers.
Haryana deputy chief minister Dushyant Chautala said the state government held eight rounds of meeting with industry associations before finalising the reservation. “After consultations, if we have to incorporate some technical things in the rules, will do that so that industry comes to our state in an even bigger way,” he said.
As per the 2011 census, Haryana, along with Maharashtra, Delhi, Gujarat, and Uttar Pradesh, is home to 50% of the country’s interstate migrants. In 2020, when Haryana launched a portal to facilitate the movement of migrant workers to their states in view of the Covid-19 pandemic, 800,000 people registered to move out.
Welcoming the Sangh’s intervention on the issue, Professor Amitabh Kundu, distinguished fellow at the New Delhi-based think tank Research and Information System for Developing Countries, said, “I am happy if the Sangh parivar has decided to take up the issue of discrimination in jobs based on place of origin. Such reservations that are borne out of political compulsions are against the Indian constitution and against the inter state migrant act,” Kundu said. He added that states such as Haryana that have significant inbound migrant population should think about the repercussions of the law. “Even states such as Madhya Pradesh, which have a high out- migration population and have announced similar reservation, should consider how their people will be treated in other states,” Kundu said.