NEW DELHI: On Tuesday, as the government introduced ‘The Constitution (28th Amendment) Bill 2023’ in Lok Sabha opening ground for a fresh discussion on reservation for women, the long journey of deliberations on the issue in the past decades shows that the demand for reservation for OBC women has been a contentious point at the centre of the debate for certain parties.The issue of 33% reservation of seats for women in Parliament and state assemblies has seen many fiery debates both on the floor of the House in Parliament and off it in the past.The joint parliamentary committee report examining the 1996 women’s reservation Bill had recommended that reservation be provided for women of Other Backward Classes (OBCs) once the Constitution was amended to allow for reservation for OBCs.

It also recommended that reservation be extended to the Rajya Sabha and the Legislative Councils.

Neither of these recommendations were incorporated in the 2010 Bill or the latest one.

The Constitution does not provide for reservation for OBCs in Lok Sabha and state assemblies.With the Lok Sabha set to discuss the new bill on Wednesday, here we look at the arguments presented by political parties and recommendations and observations made on the issue of OBC quota in the reports of the joint parliamentary committee and parliamentary standing committees led by Geeta Mukherjee in 1996 and Jayanthi Natarajan in 2009 respectively.The parliamentary standing committee on law and justice in its report on the Constitution (108th amendment) Bill, 2008 presented in Parliament in December 2009 had stated that “the question of reservation within reservation for OBC women and some minorities generated great discussion in the Committee, with one section of opinion strongly of the view that such OBC reservation within reservation should be provided.

The Committee was of the view that this matter should be considered by the Government and action on this taken at the appropriate time.”They noted that the Geeta Mukherjee led Committee that looked into the 1996 reservation bill had recommended that the Government may consider the issue of extending the benefit of reservation to OBCs also “at the appropriate time so that the women belonging to OBC classes will also get the benefit of reservation”.

However, the Mukherjee led committee had also observed that “such reservation of seats has not been provided for in the Bill for women belonging to OBCs because there is no reservation for them at present under the Constitution as it exists for scheduled castes and scheduled tribes”.Women Reservation Bill: What women think about 'Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam' Bill? Revolutionary or Jumla?The report also records the views of different political parties on the issue.

For instance, in its written memorandum, the Rashtriya Janta Dal had stated that “in case of providing reservation to women, there must be a quota for OBC, minorities including Muslims, Christians and others, and Dalits (SC/ST) within it.

There must be a quota within quota for these sections of women proportionate to their population in the country.” The Samajwadi Party said that “if reservation is to be given to women, there must be a quota for OBC and Muslim women within it.”On the other hand parties like the Nationalist Congress Party had opined that they don’t find any need for reasons for special quota for OBC within the women’s quota and cited the then configuration of the House to highlight there is good representation of OBCs existing on the unreserved seats.In its memorandum, the Bharatiya Janata Party had stated that while it supports the proposed women reservation bill they “firmly reject the demand of Quota within Quota..”No quota for women in 2024: Must-know details about the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam introduced in ParliamentThe representatives of CPI (M) said that they do not agree with the demand for extending on OBC women quota as there is no Constitutional provision for reservation for OBCs.

“So, this will not stand for scrutiny,” they stated.Watch: Women BJP workers celebrate in Telangana as women's reservation bill takes center stage in parliamentThe standing committee on law and justice failed to reach a consensus in its final report.

However, it recommended that the bill “be passed in Parliament and put in action without further delay.” Two members of the committee, Virender Bhatia and Shailendra Kumar (both belonging to the Samajwadi Party) dissented stating that they were not against providing reservation to women but disagreed with the way this Bill was drafted.

One of their demands being that there should be a quota for women belonging to OBCs and minorities.WatchUproar in Lok Sabha as Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal tables Women's Reservation Bill