What do you think?
Rate this book
Falling Over Backwards
How is it that what was explicitly forbidden by the Constitution - classification based on cast has become the rule? How is it that what were enabling provision have become mandatory minima? Where does the figure 50 per cent come from? How is that in practice it is exceeded blatantly? Are the benefits not being hogged by a few, the better–off among these castes? Has the “creamy layer” been actually hived off? How is that what were begun as reservations in promotion also? How did this become a right to accelerated promotions? How did that become a right “accelerated promotions with consequential seniority”? How did that become a right to have the prescribed standards diluted to the point of being waived altogether? Even in educational institutions. Is this any way to become a knowledge super - power”? As there has been no caste - wise enumeration and tabulation since the 1931 Census, where does this mythical figure, “OBCs are 52 per cent of the population” come from? And what did the 1931 Census itself say about its cast - wise figures?
393 pages, Hardcover
First published June 5, 2006
38 people are currently reading
488 people want to read
About the author
Arun Shourie
39 books297 followersIndian economist, journalist, author and politician.
He has worked as an economist with the World Bank, a consultant to the Planning Commission of India, editor of the Indian Express and The Times of India and a Minister of Communications and Information Technology in the Vajpayee Ministry (1998–2004). He was awarded the Ramon Magsaysay Award in 1982 and the Padma Bhushan in 1990.
Popularly perceived as one of the main Hindu nationalist intellectuals during the 90s and early 2000s.
He has worked as an economist with the World Bank, a consultant to the Planning Commission of India, editor of the Indian Express and The Times of India and a Minister of Communications and Information Technology in the Vajpayee Ministry (1998–2004). He was awarded the Ramon Magsaysay Award in 1982 and the Padma Bhushan in 1990.
Popularly perceived as one of the main Hindu nationalist intellectuals during the 90s and early 2000s.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
March 23, 2016
This book deals with the issue of OBC reservations and Supreme Court judgements pertaining to the same. It was surprising to know how Constitution talked of 'class' which was (deliberately and obstinately ?) misinterpreted as caste. The caste census of 1931 was used which anyways covered only 60% of the population. How merit and efficiency were made terms to scorn at ! etc
If u have read Arun Shourie before, u will already know to expect a terse and a bit repetitive style with no-comic relief as is d case with pop-writers today. But, rest assured the subject matter is dealt in great depth. This should have been 4/5 but then the choice of subject and thoroughness warrants a generous rating.
If u have read Arun Shourie before, u will already know to expect a terse and a bit repetitive style with no-comic relief as is d case with pop-writers today. But, rest assured the subject matter is dealt in great depth. This should have been 4/5 but then the choice of subject and thoroughness warrants a generous rating.
August 27, 2012
This book will test your patience, and when you succeed, rewards will be unparalleled...Lengthy, repetitive at times, still a honest book one must read.
January 2, 2020
Lengthy
Detailly
Arun Shourie at his best. This one took me almost 2 weeks.
Detailly
Arun Shourie at his best. This one took me almost 2 weeks.
July 18, 2011
An eye-opener!
June 9, 2013
best written book on caste reservations made by govts and instituted by courts
November 11, 2014
'Falling over backwards - an essay against the reservation and judicial populism' is one of the most meticulously researched and persuading book written by a zeal of a person with a mission in his mind. And the mission was to make it a point that individual should be the unit of the governance not the interest groups or communities. The author Arun Shourie who has written many more books on the topics which just do not get too much attention in the public discourse that we have in place today. Written in 2005, Shourie took many cases from the history, words from the constitutional amendments, and excerpts from the judgments of high courts and supreme court just to debate on the merit of the reservations being given on any basis. In this book, Shourie emphasizes on basically three things : first, the tendency among the public to register as uppers castes during British Raj and subsequent loosening of the caste boundaries; second, the politicians approach to identity politics and seeing this as a chance to rise in Indian political landscape; third; the response of High Courts and Supreme Courts and the arguments given by progressive judges. These are three main areas in which the author researched and put forward his arguments.
Read more about these points in my detailed book review here:
BOOK REVIEW : 'FALLING OVER BACKWARDS' BY 'ARUN SHOURIE'
Read more about these points in my detailed book review here:
BOOK REVIEW : 'FALLING OVER BACKWARDS' BY 'ARUN SHOURIE'
December 19, 2017
When Prime Minister Vishwanath Pratap Singh announced that he was instituting reservation for Other Backward Castes (OBC) in government service in 1990, it was a bolt from the blue. Nobody had seen it coming and all hell broke loose as the country plunged into a series of violent protests, in which a few young men publicly immolated themselves to vent their anger at the supposed loss of jobs for forward castes. The backward classes which constituted 74 per cent of the population and the progressives among the upper castes welcomed the initiative, while quite understandably, a section of the people opposed it tooth and nail in parliament and law courts. The Supreme Court finally delivered its verdict in 1993. It upheld the constitutional validity of reservation for OBCs, but ruled that the well-off among them, christened the Creamy Layer, should be removed from its ambit. The country still follows that principle, while sporadic opposition to reservation continued. By the beginning of the present century, a new trend became noticeable. The upper castes also started the clamour for labeling themselves backward and accord reservations to them. The Jats have almost succeeded in getting what they wanted, while the Patidars of Gujarat are currently on the war path. Their logic is clear. With every judicial avenue closed for repealing reservation, and the political route impossibly difficult as the physical number of backward castes are far more numerous, the only thing they can hope for is to crash the gates, register all forward castes as backward and thus defeat the very purpose of granting reservation. Arun Shourie was the editor of the Indian Express when the Mandal agitation roiled the country. His fiery editorials and polemical essays added fuel to the fire. Shourie still retains his strident tone, even after all these years. This book contains his observations on reservation and the judicial support it had received. Terming those judges who ruled in its favour as activists and revolutionaries, he spits venom at the so-called judicial populism.
Shourie’s attack on the backward castes of India runs on all fronts. He treats them as non-entities, people with no talent to run government institutions, but who wrested concessions from pliable politicians owing to their electoral muscle. He quotes a letter Prime Minister Nehru wrote to state chief ministers in 1961 in which he reacted strongly against reservation which leads to inefficiency and second-rate standards. If we go for reservations on communal and caste basis, we swamp the bright and able people and remain second- or third-rate. Nehru adds that this way lays not only folly, but disaster. The parting shot is Nehru’s rhetorical question on how we could build the public sector or indeed any sector with second-rate people. Shourie builds on where Nehru has left off by questioning even the existence of backward castes. His argument is that the consciousness of caste came into being only when the British started counting castes in decennial census. Centuries of untouchability and caste oppression are just wished away by the author, who then takes the next arrow from the quiver. Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India, on which the entire scheme of reservation rests, envisages reservation on appointments and posts in favour of any backward class of citizens. The statute uses the term ‘class’ instead of ‘caste’ and about a quarter of the book is dedicated to push this idea down the readers’ throats. Several judgments of the apex court had clarified this issue long back. They held that the term ‘classes’ mentioned in the constitution indeed referred to ‘castes’. This is quite logical if a bit of thought is applied to the matter. The framers of the constitution wanted to reserve jobs for the backward sections lagged behind others. But, if they specifically mentioned castes in the constitution, that’d have been valid only for that period, as there is every chance that the plight of the backward castes might improve in the future and the need for reserving seats for them might become obsolete. Another group – need not exactly be a caste – may become backward by then and the provisions of this enabling clause in the constitution can be used to provide succor to them. We want the Constitution’s provisions to be applicable for a very long time to come. May be it is with this intent that the makers of the constitution used the generic term ‘class’ instead of the very specific ‘caste’? It is for the legislature to decide which group is backward and the duty of the judiciary is to review it. Both have done their jobs well, but the author accuses them of populism.
The book includes some prescient remarks that highlight the shrewdness of the author. He rightly surmises that if individuals and groups get rewarded on the basis of their being different from the rest, leaders will foment a politics that exacerbates the difference (p.33). That such an insightful scholar let go of absurd notions as well may surprise the readers. The hypothesis that castes in British India were in a state of flux is one such, especially with exodus of rural folk to the cities. Shourie’s point is that ‘in towns, it was quite easy for a low-caste person to claim a higher caste without any fear of detection’ (p.56). So, that’s it! The only way out for a person of backward castes to gain some dignity is to masquerade as a high-caste one in a far-off town! Elimination of the comparatively better off among the downtrodden communities has been a strong demand of all those who opposed reservations. Unfortunately, the passion of petty jealousy which underpins this idea remained unnoticed in the judicial review and the court’s reason for exempting the creamy layer was that reservations were to be for a class. To be a class, the group must be homogeneous. When some in it are clearly different from the others, it loses the character as a class. Besides, unless these advanced persons are excluded, they’d hog all the benefits that legislation may seek to provide to the backward classes. But, eliminating such a big chunk of eligible people from the purview of reservation has made it partly ineffective. It was reported recently that less than half the seats reserved for OBCs were actually filled in the last quarter century in which reservation was in place.
Shourie treats the backward castes as subhuman morons as he pities the condition of the administration where half the posts are manned by such people having no qualifications for the job. His contemptuous duplicity fails to mention that all candidates – irrespective of whether they are backward or not – must qualify the basic criterion say, a degree. There is no relaxation to the backward castes in that. It is only in the screening process that some allowance is made. However, screening is not an essential part of selection. If the total number of candidates is less than or equal to the number of vacancies, everyone would be selected without further screening, provided they have the prescribed academic qualifications. Can we say that people appointed thus are not qualified enough or not talented enough? Shourie himself admits that not enough candidates from reserved categories are found. According to his own data, in 1992, the medical officers of UP from SC/ST communities comprised only 6 per cent of the total, whereas 20 per cent was earmarked for them as reservation. Most of the quota remained vacant, but the author fumes over promotions granted to them. Shourie breaches his leash and jumps at the judges with foaming mouth as he accuses them of populism and playing into the hands of opportunist politicians. His choicest invectives are reserved for Justice V R Krishna Iyer.
The book is good reading for those who want to follow the court verdicts against finer aspects of reservation and how the legislature bypassed it by amending the constitution. However, finding the useful information from the sea of irrelevant rant will be a herculean task. Many points and ideas are needlessly repeated with detailed nitpicking of court rulings and judgments reproduced verbatim. It is plain boring at such times. The book is written in a propagandist style with absolutely no wit or humour. The author is always in a state of rage right throughout the entire text. This can be expected when you feel that what you are saying is not convincing to the people who hear it.
The book is not recommended.
Shourie’s attack on the backward castes of India runs on all fronts. He treats them as non-entities, people with no talent to run government institutions, but who wrested concessions from pliable politicians owing to their electoral muscle. He quotes a letter Prime Minister Nehru wrote to state chief ministers in 1961 in which he reacted strongly against reservation which leads to inefficiency and second-rate standards. If we go for reservations on communal and caste basis, we swamp the bright and able people and remain second- or third-rate. Nehru adds that this way lays not only folly, but disaster. The parting shot is Nehru’s rhetorical question on how we could build the public sector or indeed any sector with second-rate people. Shourie builds on where Nehru has left off by questioning even the existence of backward castes. His argument is that the consciousness of caste came into being only when the British started counting castes in decennial census. Centuries of untouchability and caste oppression are just wished away by the author, who then takes the next arrow from the quiver. Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India, on which the entire scheme of reservation rests, envisages reservation on appointments and posts in favour of any backward class of citizens. The statute uses the term ‘class’ instead of ‘caste’ and about a quarter of the book is dedicated to push this idea down the readers’ throats. Several judgments of the apex court had clarified this issue long back. They held that the term ‘classes’ mentioned in the constitution indeed referred to ‘castes’. This is quite logical if a bit of thought is applied to the matter. The framers of the constitution wanted to reserve jobs for the backward sections lagged behind others. But, if they specifically mentioned castes in the constitution, that’d have been valid only for that period, as there is every chance that the plight of the backward castes might improve in the future and the need for reserving seats for them might become obsolete. Another group – need not exactly be a caste – may become backward by then and the provisions of this enabling clause in the constitution can be used to provide succor to them. We want the Constitution’s provisions to be applicable for a very long time to come. May be it is with this intent that the makers of the constitution used the generic term ‘class’ instead of the very specific ‘caste’? It is for the legislature to decide which group is backward and the duty of the judiciary is to review it. Both have done their jobs well, but the author accuses them of populism.
The book includes some prescient remarks that highlight the shrewdness of the author. He rightly surmises that if individuals and groups get rewarded on the basis of their being different from the rest, leaders will foment a politics that exacerbates the difference (p.33). That such an insightful scholar let go of absurd notions as well may surprise the readers. The hypothesis that castes in British India were in a state of flux is one such, especially with exodus of rural folk to the cities. Shourie’s point is that ‘in towns, it was quite easy for a low-caste person to claim a higher caste without any fear of detection’ (p.56). So, that’s it! The only way out for a person of backward castes to gain some dignity is to masquerade as a high-caste one in a far-off town! Elimination of the comparatively better off among the downtrodden communities has been a strong demand of all those who opposed reservations. Unfortunately, the passion of petty jealousy which underpins this idea remained unnoticed in the judicial review and the court’s reason for exempting the creamy layer was that reservations were to be for a class. To be a class, the group must be homogeneous. When some in it are clearly different from the others, it loses the character as a class. Besides, unless these advanced persons are excluded, they’d hog all the benefits that legislation may seek to provide to the backward classes. But, eliminating such a big chunk of eligible people from the purview of reservation has made it partly ineffective. It was reported recently that less than half the seats reserved for OBCs were actually filled in the last quarter century in which reservation was in place.
Shourie treats the backward castes as subhuman morons as he pities the condition of the administration where half the posts are manned by such people having no qualifications for the job. His contemptuous duplicity fails to mention that all candidates – irrespective of whether they are backward or not – must qualify the basic criterion say, a degree. There is no relaxation to the backward castes in that. It is only in the screening process that some allowance is made. However, screening is not an essential part of selection. If the total number of candidates is less than or equal to the number of vacancies, everyone would be selected without further screening, provided they have the prescribed academic qualifications. Can we say that people appointed thus are not qualified enough or not talented enough? Shourie himself admits that not enough candidates from reserved categories are found. According to his own data, in 1992, the medical officers of UP from SC/ST communities comprised only 6 per cent of the total, whereas 20 per cent was earmarked for them as reservation. Most of the quota remained vacant, but the author fumes over promotions granted to them. Shourie breaches his leash and jumps at the judges with foaming mouth as he accuses them of populism and playing into the hands of opportunist politicians. His choicest invectives are reserved for Justice V R Krishna Iyer.
The book is good reading for those who want to follow the court verdicts against finer aspects of reservation and how the legislature bypassed it by amending the constitution. However, finding the useful information from the sea of irrelevant rant will be a herculean task. Many points and ideas are needlessly repeated with detailed nitpicking of court rulings and judgments reproduced verbatim. It is plain boring at such times. The book is written in a propagandist style with absolutely no wit or humour. The author is always in a state of rage right throughout the entire text. This can be expected when you feel that what you are saying is not convincing to the people who hear it.
The book is not recommended.
Read
July 17, 2020Honestly, I couldn't read through the entire book line by line: I skimmed over a major chunk. Although the subject under consideration had been thoroughly researched and deliberated, the length and the language make it a not so comfortable read to a lay person. Furthermore, every argument that Shourie presents is defended by innumerable sources making the overall read feel repetitive and tedious. Nevertheless, a quick scan is also enlightening enough that I wish everyone to give it a shot.
I believe that a more concise and jargon-less book would have garnered a wider reach that Mr. Shourie might have hoped for while writing this one.
I believe that a more concise and jargon-less book would have garnered a wider reach that Mr. Shourie might have hoped for while writing this one.
September 9, 2022
Highly meticulous take which dissects multiple judgments and constitutional amendments regarding reservation in India.
January 19, 2023
An essay against reservations and judicial populism. It took me more than a week of continuous reading with minimum distraction to understand this book. I blame it on the complex judicial jargons that were quite new to me. The fact that this book is not read widely, despite its author being widely known, is a travesty in itself.
The book starts with the words of the first Prime Minister of India where he expresses his disappointment over the inclusion of reservations in the Parliament of India. Perhaps, that was directed at the Nehruvian scholars who purposely ignore such facts to spread the extent of their ideology. The whole idea was to construct rational, logical, historical, judicial, and constitutional arguments against the idea of reservations based on caste, class, and religion. The author puts forth factual data from different censuses and makes the readers wonder about the reason behind the continuity of reservations till now. Arun Shourie presents the readers with contradicting statements of the Indian Courts of Justice and asks them to think about the conclusion with their own approach and understanding mechanism.
Is presenting the problem the only work of such books? The author strongly differs from this statement. He presents several steps that could be taken to gradually get over this disease, id est, reservations. This book must be read by all those who are into the politics, histories, and laws of India.
The book starts with the words of the first Prime Minister of India where he expresses his disappointment over the inclusion of reservations in the Parliament of India. Perhaps, that was directed at the Nehruvian scholars who purposely ignore such facts to spread the extent of their ideology. The whole idea was to construct rational, logical, historical, judicial, and constitutional arguments against the idea of reservations based on caste, class, and religion. The author puts forth factual data from different censuses and makes the readers wonder about the reason behind the continuity of reservations till now. Arun Shourie presents the readers with contradicting statements of the Indian Courts of Justice and asks them to think about the conclusion with their own approach and understanding mechanism.
Is presenting the problem the only work of such books? The author strongly differs from this statement. He presents several steps that could be taken to gradually get over this disease, id est, reservations. This book must be read by all those who are into the politics, histories, and laws of India.
October 20, 2024
Arun Shorie's most important work till date. I would say it's even more important than his seminal work 'eminent historians'
February 5, 2016
Most people, whether individually or as social groups, communities, have two very distinct, very separate needs, often but not always necessarily, conflicting.
One is for more of wealth, more of power, stability of well being, security, and so forth. This is of course well understood and often used for a hold over the person or group as a leverage to use them.
Another is of the sort that might begin to border on higher ideal - of a rise in terms of things other than those considered worldly needs.
However, when the two conflict, often people free to choose will go for the worldly needs rather than higher ideals. And then resent those that do not, or cannot, for whatever reason.
Hence the effort to portray one's community as higher if that gives a rise in status and all out efforts to prove it so, and on the other hand the opposite if that pays in terms of economic security.
Given a chance - that is, if the two do not conflict - most people would prefer the higher ideal and rise in terms of other than worldly criteria.
It is a pity that such chances are withdrawn and instead there is an incentive to downgrade one's roots in order to secure a better economic status. It is all the more reprehensible if the nation's higher authorities who are responsible for encouraging progress and evolution of nation and holding up just treatment go overboard bending over backwards and instead are responsible for a race in the nation to prove one was from low roots, and indulge in reprehensible practices including alcohol to prove the claim, all in order to secure benefits of a policy of reservations without merit on basis of ancestry from backward - not poor, but otherwise backward - classes.
One is for more of wealth, more of power, stability of well being, security, and so forth. This is of course well understood and often used for a hold over the person or group as a leverage to use them.
Another is of the sort that might begin to border on higher ideal - of a rise in terms of things other than those considered worldly needs.
However, when the two conflict, often people free to choose will go for the worldly needs rather than higher ideals. And then resent those that do not, or cannot, for whatever reason.
Hence the effort to portray one's community as higher if that gives a rise in status and all out efforts to prove it so, and on the other hand the opposite if that pays in terms of economic security.
Given a chance - that is, if the two do not conflict - most people would prefer the higher ideal and rise in terms of other than worldly criteria.
It is a pity that such chances are withdrawn and instead there is an incentive to downgrade one's roots in order to secure a better economic status. It is all the more reprehensible if the nation's higher authorities who are responsible for encouraging progress and evolution of nation and holding up just treatment go overboard bending over backwards and instead are responsible for a race in the nation to prove one was from low roots, and indulge in reprehensible practices including alcohol to prove the claim, all in order to secure benefits of a policy of reservations without merit on basis of ancestry from backward - not poor, but otherwise backward - classes.
June 12, 2015
The book can be submitted as a good thesis for Mr. Shourie to earn his Phd in Literature or Philosophy. The research undertaken is really Exhaustive and Profound, though the average reader will find the book quite repetitive, heavy as well as confusing. This book is a bible for any student interested in the history,present as well as the future of reservations in India. The consternation in the average public`s mind regarding the future of this country along with reservations hovering at every stage is really alarming.Overall an average read.
March 2, 2016
One of the very few well researched book on this topic. But can be too boring for it is far too repetitive and its not so interesting language.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews