Why is it in the News?

The Calcutta High Court has struck down a series of orders passed by the West Bengal government between March 2010 and May 2012 by which 77 communities (classes), 75 of which were Muslim, were given reservation under the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category.

Context:

• In a significant ruling on Wednesday, the Calcutta High Court dismissed all Other Backward Classes (OBC) certificates issued in West Bengal since 2010.
• A division bench of Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty and Justice Rajasekhar Mantha made this decision while addressing a public interest litigation (PIL) that challenged the process of granting OBC certificates.
• The court directed that a new list of OBCs should be created based on the West Bengal Commission for Backward Classes Act of 1993.

What is the Issue With OBC Certificates?

• In 2010, the West Bengal (WB) government issued notifications, on the recommendations of the West Bengal Backward Classes Commission, including 42 classes (41 from the Muslim community) as Other Backward Classes (OBCs), entitling them to reservation and representation in government employment under Article 16(4) of the Constitution.
• Also in 2010, an order was issued sub-categorizing the 108 identified OBCs in the state (66 pre-existing and 42 newly identified) into 56 OBC-A (more Backward) and 52 OBC-B (Backward) categories.
• In 2012, the West Bengal government included 35 classes (34 from the Muslim community) as OBCs.
• In 2013, the West Bengal Backward Classes (Other than Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) (Reservation of vacancies and posts) Act 2012 gave recognition to all 77 new OBCs.
• These orders and legislation were challenged in the Calcutta High Court on the grounds that the declaration of classes as OBCs was based purely on religion, the categorization was not based on any acceptable data, and the survey conducted by the Commission was unscientific.

The Calcutta High Court's Ruling on West Bengal's Reservation Policies:

• The court found that religion had been the sole basis for the state government to provide reservation, which is prohibited by the Constitution and court orders.
• The High Court heavily relied on the Supreme Court's judgment in Indra Sawhney v Union of India (Mandal judgment).
  • In 1992, a nine-judge Bench held that OBCs cannot be identified and given reservation solely based on religion.
  • The Supreme Court also held that all states must establish a Backward Classes Commission to identify and recommend classes of citizens for inclusion and exclusion in the state OBC list.
• The High Court noted that the Commission's recommendation had been made with "lightning speed" and without using any objective criteria to determine the backwardness of these classes.
• The court stated that there is no question that the said communities have been used as a political prop for vote bank politics.
• The court struck down some provisions of West Bengal's 2012 Act, including:
  • The provision allowed the state government to sub-classify OBC reservations into OBC-A and OBC-B categories.
  • The provision allows the state to amend the Schedule of the 2012 Act to add to the list of OBCs.
• The court held that sub-classification is meant to address different levels of deprivation faced by different communities and could only be done based on scientific data.
• Since the Commission acknowledged that the government did not consult it prior to sub-classification within OBC, the court ruled that the state government must consult the Commission to create a fair and unbiased classification.

The Position on Religiously-Based Reservations in the Constitution and Court Orders:

The Constitution of India:

• Article 15(1) specifically prohibits the state from discriminating against citizens on grounds only of religion and caste (along with sex, race, and place of birth).
• Article 16(2) specifically prohibits the state from discriminating against citizens on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence or any of them, in respect of any employment or office under the State.

The Observations of the Supreme Court:

• In M R Balaji (1962), the SC held that while castes among Hindus may be an important factor to take into account when assessing the social backwardness of certain groups or classes of citizens, it cannot be the only test in this regard.
• In E P Royappa vs State Of Tamil Nadu (1973), the SC held that equality is a dynamic concept and cannot be confined within traditional limits.
• In State of Kerala vs N M Thomas (1975), the SC held that the crucial word 'only' in Articles 15 and Article 16 implies that if a religious, racial, or caste group constitutes a weaker section (under Article 46) or constitutes a backward class, it would be entitled to special provisions for its advancement.
• The SC in Indra Sawhney (1992) laid down that any social group if found to be backward under the same criteria as others, will be entitled to be treated as a backward class.

What are the Current Provisions of Reservation?

• The current provisions of reservation in India stem from the Constituent Assembly's decision to provide employment reservations for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under Article 16(4A) of the Constitution.
  • Initially approved for a period of 10 years, these reservations have been renewed annually ever since.
  • Notably, Christian and Muslim communities within the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes do not receive reservation benefits.
• The decision not to extend reservation to religious minorities was influenced by the partition, as reflected in Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel's presentation of a special sub-committee report in 1949, addressing the issues faced by minority populations in East Punjab and West Bengal.
• The committee, which included Nehru, Rajendra Prasad, KM Munshi, and Ambedkar, concluded that the country's conditions had changed to such an extent that "in the context of independent India and the present circumstances, it is no longer appropriate to reserve seats for Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, or any other religious minority."
• They believed that reservations for religious communities "may lead to some degree of separatism and, to an extent, contradict the concept of a secular democratic state."
  • They argued that the fundamental rights of freedom of religion and the right of minorities to maintain their own educational institutions were sufficient safeguards for protecting minorities.
  • However, the Advisory Committee agreed that "the specific situation of the Scheduled Castes would make it necessary to grant them reservation for the originally decided ten-year period."
• Ambedkar attempted to resolve several positions on the caste question by introducing the concept of backwardness and reservation as methods of creating a society beyond caste.

Arguments Related to Religion-based Reservation in India:

Arguments in Favour of Religion-Based Reservations in India:

• Socio-Economic Backwardness: According to the Sachar Committee Report, Muslims in India lag behind other communities in terms of socio-economic indicators such as education, employment, and income.
  • Reservations can help in bridging this gap.
• Constitutional Mandate: The Indian Constitution provides for affirmative action for socially and educationally backward classes irrespective of religious and cultural denomination.
• Ensuring Adequate Representation: Reservations can ensure adequate representation of underrepresented religious groups in employment, education, and other fields.

Arguments Against Religion-Based Reservations in India:

• Secularism: Critics argue that providing reservations based on religion goes against the principle of secularism enshrined in the Indian Constitution, which advocates equal treatment of all religions by the state.
• Undermining National Unity: Religion-based reservations could undermine national unity as it could lead to resentment and division among different communities.
• Economic Criteria: Reservations should be based solely on economic criteria rather than religion, to ensure that benefits reach those who are truly economically disadvantaged, irrespective of their religion.
• Administrative Challenges: Implementing reservations based on religion could pose administrative challenges, such as determining the criteria for identifying beneficiaries and preventing misuse of the system.

Way Forward:

• Socio-Economic Criteria: Instead of religion, reservations could be based on socio-economic criteria, ensuring that benefits reach the most disadvantaged individuals regardless of their religion.
• Empowerment Through Education: Focus on improving educational infrastructure and providing skill development programs to empower the backward communities and enhance their socio-economic status.
• Inclusive Policies: Implement inclusive policies that address the specific needs of the backward religious communities in areas such as education, employment, and healthcare, without resorting to religious-based reservations.
• Dialogue and Consensus: Engage in a dialogue involving all stakeholders to arrive at a consensus to address the socio-economic challenges faced by the various communities, ensuring that any measures taken are in line with constitutional values and principles.

Conclusion

While recognizing the socio-economic disparities faced by various religious communities in India, the emphasis on inclusive policies based on socio-economic criteria emerges as pivotal. By prioritizing education empowerment, promoting dialogue, and fostering consensus, India can navigate towards a more equitable and inclusive society. By steering away from religion-based reservations and focusing on holistic development, India can uphold its constitutional values while addressing the diverse needs of its population.

Why is it in the News?

The hyperpoliticisation of Indian higher education is a grave threat to academic institutions, the academic profession, and intellectual life in general.

Context:

• The higher education system in India is one of the largest globally, showcasing its rich historical legacy and future ambitions.
• The country is home to an impressive range of institutions, including the globally renowned Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) and Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs), as well as a vast network of universities and colleges.
• Notably, the QS World University Rankings for Asia 2024 highlight India as having the most represented higher education system.
• However, this expansive framework faces numerous challenges and opportunities that shape the current higher education landscape in India.
• While access has significantly expanded, concerns about quality, relevance, and the ability to prepare youth for the 21st century remain.
• Additionally, recent reports have pointed to a troubling trend of increasing politicization within Indian higher education institutions, which threatens academic freedom, intellectual discourse, and overall educational quality.

Current Status of Higher Education in India:

As per the All India Survey of Higher Education (AISHE) 2021-22, released in January 2024:

• Student Enrolment: Higher education institutes have seen a significant rise in student enrolment, reaching 4.33 crore in 2021-22 from 4.14 crore in 2020-21 and 3.42 crore in 2014-15.
  • Notably, women's enrolment has surged by 32% to 2.07 crore in 2021-22 from 1.5 crore in 2014-15, with the highest proportion enrolled at the postgraduate level (55.4%).
• Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) and Gender Parity Index (GPI): India's estimated GER for the age group 18-23 years stands at 28.4%.
  • The GPI, reflecting the female GER to male GER ratio, is 1.01 at the national level, indicating gender parity.
• Discipline-wise Enrolment: At the undergraduate level, the Bachelor of Arts (BA) programme leads with 34.2% enrolment, followed by science (14.8%), commerce (13.3%), and engineering and technology (11.8%).
  • Social science dominates postgraduate enrolment, with around 10.8 lakh students.
• Primacy of Government Institutions: Government universities attract 73.7% of all students, despite comprising only 58.6% of all universities.
  • State public universities hold the largest share of enrolment, accounting for approximately 31% of government-owned universities.

Current Challenges in India's Higher Education System:

• Politicization and Lack of Autonomy: Concerns arise regarding the growing politicization of higher education institutions, including allegations of political interference in appointments and curriculum decisions.
  • Many institutions lack autonomy in crucial areas like faculty recruitment and curriculum design, hindering innovation and adaptability.
• Inequitable Access and Low GER: Access to higher education remains unequal, with disparities based on socio-economic status, gender, and geography.
  • Although India's Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) has improved (currently 28.4%), it still falls below the global average of 36.7%.
• Limited Funding: Budget cuts in the education sector, including a 7% reduction in the Interim Budget 2024-25 and a 61% decrease in the allocation for the University Grants Commission, pose significant challenges.
  • Despite rising Gross Expenditure on Research and Development (GERD), India's R&D investment as a percentage of GDP lags behind other countries.
• Shortage of Faculty and Brain Drain: There is a severe shortage of qualified faculty members in Indian higher education institutions, with over 30% of teaching positions vacant in 45 Central Universities as of 2023.
  • The brain drain of talented academics to other countries or the private sector exacerbates this issue.
• Inadequate Industry-Academia Collaboration: Insufficient collaboration between higher education institutions and industries leads to a skill gap among graduates, with a significant demand-supply gap in key roles such as ML engineer and data scientist.
• Uneven Regional Development: Higher education institutions' development varies across regions and states, with states like Delhi, Tamil Nadu, and Maharashtra hosting more reputed institutions compared to northeastern and central regions, which face challenges in terms of quality and access.

How Can the Higher Education System in India Be Revamped?

• Redefine Universities' Role: Shift focus from rote learning to practical skill development through project-based learning, internships, and industry collaborations.
  • Encourage universities to engage with local communities on social development projects, promoting social responsibility among students.
  • Transform institutes from "Degree Issuers" to "Skill Generators."
• Open Educational Resources (OER): Enhance the National Digital Library of India and promote the development and adoption of open educational resources, like MIT OpenCourseWare, providing free access to quality educational materials.
  • This approach could reduce costs, enhance access, and foster a culture of knowledge sharing.
• Entrepreneurship and Innovation Centers: Establish dedicated centres within universities, inspired by Stanford University's StartX program, offering mentorship, funding opportunities, and a supportive ecosystem for students and faculty to transform innovative ideas into successful ventures.
• Dual Study Programs: Implement phase-wise dual study programs, inspired by Germany's apprenticeship model, where students combine theoretical learning at universities with practical training in companies.
  • This approach ensures industry-relevant skill development and enhances employability.
• Competency-based Credentialing and Blockchain Certificates: Implement a competency-based credentialing system that recognizes skills and competencies acquired through various learning pathways.
  • Leverage blockchain technology to issue tamper-proof, verifiable digital certificates and credentials, promoting lifelong learning, skill-based education, and recognition of diverse learning experiences.
• Transnational Education Partnerships: Promote collaborations with reputed international universities for joint degrees, twinning programs, or branch campuses.
  • This approach could enhance global exposure, facilitate knowledge transfer, and improve the international competitiveness of Indian higher education.

Key Government Initiatives in Higher Education:

• National Education Policy (NEP) 2020: Aims to transform the education system, focusing on multidisciplinary learning, skill development, and promoting research and innovation.
  • It proposes increasing the Gross Enrollment Ratio in higher education to 50% by 2035.
• Institutions of Eminence (IoE) Scheme: Launched in 2018, this scheme selects 20 institutions to enjoy complete autonomy, aiming to improve their global rankings and enhance higher education quality.
• National Credit Framework: Designed to integrate training and skill development into the education system.
  • Credits earned by students will be stored digitally in the Academic Bank of Credits, accessible via a linked Digilocker account.
• Revamped Accreditation and Ranking Systems: The National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) ranks higher education institutions across categories, while the revamped National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) ensures quality standards among institutions.
• Digital Initiatives: SWAYAM, an online learning platform, offers courses from school to postgraduate levels.
  • The National Digital Library of India provides access to educational resources.
• SHE under INSPIRE: The Scholarship for Higher Education (SHE) program, part of the Innovation in Science Pursuit for Inspired Research (INSPIRE) by the Department of Science and Technology (DST), supports deserving students in basic and natural sciences at undergraduate, postgraduate levels and encourages research careers through scholarships.
• Study in India Program: Launched in 2018, this program attracts international students by offering scholarships and streamlining admission processes.
• Foreign Institutions in India: The University Grants Commission's 2023 regulations allow foreign universities ranked among the world's top 500 to establish branch campuses in India.

Conclusion

India's higher education sector is undergoing significant reforms and initiatives aimed at enhancing quality, accessibility, and global competitiveness. Through policies like the National Education Policy 2020 and programs such as Institutions of Eminence, the government is prioritizing multidisciplinary learning, skill development, and research promotion. Digital initiatives like SWAYAM and the Study in India Program further contribute to modernizing and internationalizing higher education, while efforts to attract foreign institutions and scholarships underscore India's commitment to fostering innovation and excellence in education.

Why is it in the News?

The amended rules will prolong the life of drugs on account of frivolous patenting, increase their prices, and make lives difficult for patients.

Context:

• India's healthcare system depends largely on accessible medications, with the generic pharmaceutical sector crucial for delivering quality drugs at affordable rates.
• The expense of medicines represents a substantial part of healthcare spending, with almost half of individuals' medical costs dedicated to purchasing prescriptions.
• Yet, the considerable expenses associated with medications, largely influenced by patenting, create significant hurdles for obtaining vital treatments.

What is the Role of Generic Pharmaceutical Companies?

• Generic pharmaceutical companies are pivotal in addressing the challenge of affordability by offering cost-effective alternatives to patented drugs.
• India's generic industry has earned global recognition for its role in providing essential medications at accessible prices.
• The development of India's patent laws has significantly influenced its pharmaceutical sector and its capacity to produce generic drugs.
  • Initially, the Indian Patent Act of the early 1970s limited patent protection to the manufacturing processes rather than the products themselves.
  • This approach facilitated the growth of the generic industry, positioning India as a major exporter of generic drugs by the late 1980s.
• However, recent revisions to the Indian Patent Law pose a threat to this ecosystem and jeopardize access to affordable healthcare.

What is the Impact of the TRIPS Agreement on India's Pharmaceutical Industry?

• The Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement, introduced in 1995, had a significant impact on India's pharmaceutical sector, shaping its development and global position. Key aspects of this impact include:
• Transition to Product Patents: A critical change brought by TRIPS was the requirement for member countries to grant patents for both products and processes, including pharmaceuticals.
  • This shift from process to product patents posed challenges for India's thriving generic pharmaceutical industry, which had previously capitalized on producing affordable versions of patented drugs.
• Challenges for India's Generic Industry: The introduction of product patents threatened India's generic pharmaceutical sector, renowned for its capacity to manufacture low-cost essential medicines.
  • These patents granted exclusive rights to inventors, restricting generic manufacturers' ability to produce and distribute affordable alternatives.
• Pressure to Comply with International Standards: The TRIPS Agreement pressured India to align its intellectual property laws with international standards, encompassing pharmaceutical patent protection.
  • This necessitated amendments to India's Patent Act to comply with TRIPS obligations while preserving the interests of its generic pharmaceutical industry and public health priorities.
• Preserving Access to Medicines: Despite TRIPS challenges, India implemented measures to safeguard access to affordable medicines.
  • Provisions like Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act, introduced in 2005, aimed to prevent granting frivolous patents for incremental innovations lacking significant therapeutic benefits.
  • This ensured compliance with TRIPS requirements while maintaining access to affordable medicines.
• Balancing Innovation and Access: The TRIPS Agreement presented India with the challenge of balancing innovation and access to essential medicines.
  • While patents incentivize innovation and investment in research and development, they can restrict access to life-saving treatments, particularly in developing countries with limited healthcare resources.
• Global Leadership in Generic Manufacturing: Despite the challenges posed by TRIPS, India emerged as a global leader in generic drug manufacturing.
  • Leveraging its manufacturing capabilities and adherence to TRIPS flexibilities, the country's generic pharmaceutical industry continued to thrive, supplying affordable medicines domestically and globally.

What is Section 3(d) of India's Patent Act?

• Section 3(d) is a crucial provision in India's Patent Act that exemplifies the flexibilities embedded within the country's patent laws.
  • It tackles concerns related to "evergreening"—a practice used by pharmaceutical companies to extend patent life through minor modifications or incremental innovations.
• The primary objective of Section 3(d) is to prevent the granting of patents for incremental innovations that lack significant therapeutic efficacy or novelty.
  • By doing so, it aims to protect access to generic versions of essential medicines and promote affordability.
• Under Section 3(d), pharmaceuticals and chemical substances are eligible for patent protection only if they demonstrate enhanced efficacy compared to existing formulations.
  • This requirement ensures that patents are granted for inventions representing genuine advancements in therapeutic efficacy rather than minor modifications or variations of existing drugs.
• Through Section 3(d), India's patent laws strike a balance between innovation and public health priorities, contributing to the overall well-being and access to medicines for its citizens.

What are the Contemporary Challenges in India's Patent Regime?

• India's patent regime currently faces several challenges, including issues related to pre-grant opposition, competition, international trade agreements, and flexibilities in patent law. These challenges have implications for access to affordable medicines, the financial burden on patent opponents, and drug availability.
• Threats to Pre-Grant Opposition: Amendments to the Indian Patent Rules have made filing opposition to patents at the pre-grant stage more challenging.
  • This change could lead to granting patents for inventions lacking genuine novelty or therapeutic efficacy.
• Impact on Competition and Drug Prices: Limitations to the pre-grant opposition process may stifle competition in the pharmaceutical market and contribute to higher drug prices.
  • By hindering generic manufacturers and civil society organizations from challenging frivolous patents, the amendments impede the availability of affordable generic drugs.
• Pressure from Pharma Majors and International Trade Agreements: These amendments reflect pressure from multinational pharmaceutical corporations, particularly Western and Japanese companies, seeking to align India's patent rules with their interests.
  • Their lobbying efforts aim to weaken India's patent regime, facilitating patent grants for incremental innovations and extending market exclusivity for their products.
• Threats to Flexibilities in Patent Law: Amendments to India's patent rules threaten the flexibilities inherent in its patent law, including provisions such as Section 3(d) that set stringent patentability criteria based on enhanced efficacy.
  • Weakening these provisions undermines India's capacity to protect public health priorities and promote access to affordable medicines.
• Financial Burden on Opponents of Patents: Imposing fees on patent opponents could deter patients, civil society organizations, and generic manufacturers from filing pre-grant oppositions.
  • This financial burden limits stakeholders' ability to safeguard public health interests and promote affordable medicines.
• Impact on Compulsory Licensing and Drug Availability: The amendments also affect the issuance of compulsory licenses, crucial for ensuring access to medicines when patents hinder availability.
  • By weakening provisions that enable compulsory licensing and limit evergreening, the amendments impede efforts to address healthcare disparities and promote equitable access to essential medicines.

Conclusion

Access to affordable medicines is vital for public health and universal healthcare. Policymakers must preserve patent law flexibilities, promote competition, and protect patient interests to ensure healthcare systems uphold affordability, accessibility, and quality. Amendments to India's Patent Rules should balance innovation, intellectual property rights, and societal well-being, mitigating negative impacts on essential medicines and public health outcomes.