top of page
Measured Spaces: A Look into Domicile Reservations
2-min read | November 14, 2021
Recently the state of Haryana passed the Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Ordinance, 2020 which aims to provide “75% of the new employment to local candidates for jobs having salary of less than Rs 50,000 per month in various privately managed companies, societies, trusts, limited liability partnership firms, partnership firms, etc., situated in the state of Haryana”.
Several other states have passed similar laws like Andhra Pradesh (75% reservation), Maharashtra (upto 80% reservation), Karnataka (75% reservation).
According to the states, such decisions are important to boost the employment rates as the government is unable to provide adequate opportunities to the youth. These policies are aimed towards increasing the representation of the marginalised groups within the state.
On the other hand such decisions by the states have been challenged several times in various High Courts and the Supreme Court. They violate the fundamental rights given to all citizens under Article 14 (Right to equality), 15 (Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth, etc), 16(3) which empowers the Parliament to provide domicile based reservation in public employment and jobs with local or any other authority under a state or a Union Territory. It also stands against the reservation ceiling ordered by the SC which is 50% reservation to maintain meritocracy. Arguments against this form of reservation are many, but the central belief of the opposition is that there will be several negative implications that the states have failed to take into consideration.
According to them, the decision hinders work-related migration which is an integral part of the economy. The private sector was not taken care of as they are profit-driven organisations and they would hire the best talents they find. This can discourage investment, especially in up-and-coming foreign investment hubs like Gurugram, as corporate culture hinges on finding the “best talent”, and domicile reservation of this sort may be a deterrent for many companies who would rather choose to operate in states that give them the freedom to choose their employees on their terms. In a diverse country like India, it’ll affect the interaction among different cultures which is against the very spirit of 'Ek Bharat, Sreshth Bharat'.
A way forward could be that the state should focus more on providing quality education, skill development and more opportunities should be provided to the youth. Even if such ordinances are passed the private sector should be excluded from it as they are profit-driven organizations and do not owe any moral obligation towards the unemployed youth just because the government failed to make effective provisions for them.
bottom of page