SC/ST under-represented in govt jobs: BJP MP Udit Raj
BJP lawmaker Udit Raj has welcomed the Supreme Court decision allowing reservation in promotion in government jobs for employees belonging to the SC and ST category and said the communities were under-represented in various categories of the central government.
Citing data from the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), the North West Delhi MP said only one SC and three ST secretaries are in the central government.
"Also, the number of assistant and joint secretaries belonging to SC/ST was very low. The number of assistant and joint secretaries belonging to SC is three and 17, respectively. In case of ST, the number of assistant and joint secretaries is 17 and 9, respectively," he said.
He said it is disheartening that despite support from all political parties to the policy, "hindrances" arise from time to time in its implementation.
"This is because reservation is implemented by an executive order which leaves room for changes. It should be codified to avoid such changes which are against the constitutional provisions," he said.
The assumption that the performance of SC and ST officers in government jobs is low is incorrect, the lawmaker said.
"There are independent studies that prove the presence of SC/ST officers improve productivity of the concerned department," he said.
Data from various ministries and departments of central government show that among the total of 84,705 Group A posts, the representation of SC was 11,333, ST was 5,013, OBC 11,016, and others 57,343 as on January 1, 2016, Raj said.
The representation in 29,0941 Group B posts was: SC 46,625; ST 20,915; OBC 42,995; and others 1,80,406, he added.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court allowed the Centre to go ahead with reservation in promotion for employees belonging to the SC and ST category in "accordance with law".
The top court took into account the Centre's submission that the entire process of promotions had come to a "standstill" due to the orders passed by various high courts, and the apex court had also ordered "status quo" in a similar matter in 2015.(PTI).
