Thread by @muralipiyer

This is why we need to change to horizontal reservation system.
If we set 20 seats as reservation, no matter which quota is used, only 20 people will be included. That means that there will be more seats available in general category for general public.

https://twitter.com/RituRathaur/status/1305067672506265601

So, you have say 4 categories with seat allocation:
A 20
B 20
C 10
General: rest
If a person belongs to category A and C, that one person will added against both A and C.
If 25 people belonging to category A qualify, 20 will be against quota of A, and rest 5 will be in general.

What’s the best way to operate this system:
Collect all information from candidates. At this point, no one knows which category they will get an option, except those who are certain only general category applies to them.

So, if A and C is applicable to P, P is forced to mark both options. If B and C is applicable to Q, Q will mark both. If only B is applicable to R, R will only mark that.
Now all go through the same eligibility criteria, and write the same test.

Say test results come as
P 47
Q 53
R 88
S 48
T 92
U 73
V 28
W 45
Mark based unified ranking is:
T R U Q S P W V
Catagory table is now built based on scores.
A(1): P W
B(1): Q V
C(0.5): R Q P
Gen(2.5): T U S
Once this is done, we now do selection.

Rank list: T R U Q S P W V.
T is chosen and assigned to Gen. R (C cat) is assigned to C. Next is U, assigned to Gen.
Seats:
C(0.5): R
Gen(2.5): T U
Rank list: Q S P W V
Now Q belongs to both B and C. But C is filled. So Q is assigned to B
B(1): Q
C(0.5): R
Gen(2.5): T U

Remaining Rank list: S P W V
S can’t be assigned to general as count exceeds quota, so is put in waiting list(WL). Next is P. C is full, so P is put in A. W and V will go to WL now.

So, final list is:
A(1): P
B(1): Q
C(0.5): R
Gen(2.5): T U

Compare this with current scheme:

P 47
Q 53
R 88
S 48
T 92
U 73
V 28
W 45
Mark based unified ranking is:
T R U Q S P W V
Catagory table is now built based on scores.
A(1): P
B(1): V
C(0.5): Q
Gen(2.5): T R

We have this strange case of the person with lowest mark gets selected

What is the rationale for shifting to horizontal reservation system.
In this example, it’s clear that during this specific round, no explicit reservation for C is required. Already a top scorer qualified from this category.
This means that lowest cut off increases to 47 from 28.

Thus horizontal system ensures higher quality intake without affecting representation of affirmative action groups.
What about creamy layer:
The best way is to add constraint in application form. Set a rule that only those with family income less than say ₹5Lpa can avail quota.

By merely changing the quota system to a horizontal system, we can ensure that deserving candidates who scored high marks are not excluded from getting due recognition.

We can ensure that a capable child doesn’t turn to crime to earn two times food.

Another advantage is that we will be able to objectively determine how effective the reservation system has been.
If cut off for reservation is higher than general category, we know that Ambedkar ji was right. And given opportunity, the deprived rose up. Caste animosity will die.

If we are finding that the difference between general cut off and quota cut off is wide, we know that mere reservation is not enough. We can plan corrective/remedial action. Maybe, give extra coaching to students from that category.

And, we have to convert all scholarships to means based scholarship with no fixed quota for a year. If 50% students require 50% fee waiver and another 25% require a 25% fee waiver, so be it. If 5% can’t afford fees at all, let us give 100% waiver. Let all poor study.

This is a simple fix to the #Reservation system.

We just shift from current vertical to #horizontalReservation system. We honour the hardworking.

We give subsidies purely on economic criteria, and not any other criteria.

This is #Dharmic #Constitution!