Sachar Committe Recommendations for muslims in India.

Have you ever wondered what are Sachar Committee recommendations for Indian Muslim  Here are the detail are as written by Arun Shourie Read it. It will blow you away!!!

Note: The Rajinder Sachar Committee, appointed by the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India was a High Level Committee For Preparation of Report on Social, Economic and Educational Status of the Muslim Community of India. It prepared its report in November 2006 and tabled it in Parliament on 30 November 2006.[1] It has come-up with this report with suggestions and solutions to include and mainstream Indian Muslims. Headed by Justice Rajinder Sachar, there were six other members : Shri Sayyid Hamid, Dr T.K. Ooman, Shri M.A. Basith, Dr Akhtar Majeed, Dr Abu Saleh Shariff and Dr Rakesh Basant. Dr Syed Zafar Mahmood was the civil servant appointed by the PM as Officer on Special Duty to the Committee. (wikipedia)
 
The full article is  here from Arun Shourie in Indian Express. The mind  boggling level of muslim appeasement by Congress led UPA can be seen  by the recommendations below by the Sachar Commission:
 
•‘Recognition of the degrees from madrassas for eligibility in competitive examinations such as the civil services, banks, defence services and other such examinations’!

•It recommends that government use public funds to encourage formation of Muslim NGOs and their activities. •It recommends that government provide financial and other support to occupations and areas in which Muslims predominate. •It recommends that Muslims be in selection committees, interview panels and boards for public services. •It recommends that a higher proportion of Muslims be inducted in offices that deal with the public — ‘the teaching community, health workers, police personnel, bank employees and so on.’ •It recommends ‘provision of ‘equivalence’ to madrassa certificates/degrees for subsequent admissions into institutions of higher level of education.’ •It recommends that banks be required to collect and maintain information about their transactions — deposits, advances — separately for Muslims, and that they be required to submit this to the Reserve Bank of India! •It recommends that advances be made to Muslims as part of the obligation imposed on banks to give advances to Priority Sectors. •It recommends that government give banks incentives to open branches in Muslim concentration areas. •It recommends that, instead of being required to report merely ‘Amount Outstanding’, banks be told to report ‘Sanctions or Disbursements to Minorities’. •It recommends that financial institutions be required to set up separate funds for training Muslim entrepreneurs, that they be required to set up special micro-credit schemes for Muslims. •It recommends that all districts more than a quarter of whose population is Muslim be brought into the prime minister’s 15-point programme. ‘There should be transparency in information about minorities in all activities,’ the Committee declares. ‘It should be made mandatory to publish/furnish information in a prescribed format once in three months and also to post the same on the website of the departments and state governments…’

•It recommends that for each programme of government, data be maintained separately about the extent to which Muslims and other minorities are benefiting from it. But it is not enough to keep data separately. Separate schemes must be instituted. •It recommends that special and separate Centrally Sponsored Schemes and Central Plan Schemes be launched for ‘minorities with an equitable provision for Muslims.’

•It recommends special measures for the promotion and spread of Urdu. •It recommends the adoption of ‘alternate admission criteria’ in universities and autonomous colleges: assessment of merit should not be assigned more than 60 per cent out of the total — the remaining 40 per cent should be assigned in accordance with the income of the household, the backwardness of the district, and the backwardness of the caste and occupation of the family. •It recommends that grants by the University Grants Commission be linked to ‘the diversity of the student population.’ •It recommends that pre-entry qualification for admission to ITIs be scaled down, that ‘eligibility for such programmes should also be extended to the madrassa educated children.’ •It recommends that ‘high quality government schools should be set up in all areas of Muslim concentration.’ •It recommends that resources and government land be made available for ‘common public spaces’ for adults of — its euphemism — ‘Socio-Religious Categories’ to ‘interact’.

•It recommends that incentives to builders, private sector employers, educational institutions be linked to ‘diversity’ of the populations in their sites and enterprises. For this purpose it wants a ‘diversity index’ to be developed for each such activity. •It recommends changes in the way constituencies are delimited. •It recommends that where Muslims are elected or selected in numbers less than adequate, ‘a carefully conceived ‘nomination’ procedure’ be worked out ‘to increase the participation of minorities at the grass roots.’ It notes that there already are the Human Rights Commission and the Minorities Commission ‘to look into complaints by the minorities with respect to state action.’ But these are not adequate as the Muslims still feel that they are not getting a fair share. The solution? Here is its recommendation, and a typical passage:
 
•‘It is imperative that if the minorities have certain perceptions of being aggrieved,’ notice the touchstone — ‘if the minorities have certain perceptions of being aggrieved’ — ‘all efforts should be made by the state to find a mechanism by which these complaints could be attended to expeditiously. This mechanism should operate in a manner which gives full satisfaction to the minorities’, notice again the touchstone — not any external criterion, but ‘full satisfaction to the minorities’ — ‘that any denial of equal opportunities or bias or discrimination in dealing with them, either by a public functionary or any private individual, will immediately be attended to and redress given. Such a mechanism should be accessible to all individuals and institutions desirous to complain that they have received less favourable treatment from any employer or any person on the basis of his/her SRC [Socio-Religious Category] background and gender.’
 
Cantwell Smith gave in his book, Modern Islam in India, published in the 1940s, of the effect that the British stratagem of instituting separate electorates for Muslims had had on the Muslim mind.
The separate electorates led Muslims, as they had been designed to lead them, he observed, ‘to vote communally, think communally, listen only to communal election speeches, judge the delegates communally, look for constitutional and other reforms only in terms of more relative communal power, and express their grievances communally.’ [Wilfred Cantwell Smith, Modern Islam in India, Second Revised Edition, 1946, reprint, Usha Publications, New Delhi, 1979, p. 216].
 
Exactly the same consequence will follow from implementing the Sachar proposals — and the reason for that is simple: the essential point about the proposals is the same — that is, the Muslims can obtain them by being separate from the rest of the country.
 
The reaction cannot but set in. ‘As Muslims are being given all this because they have distanced themselves from the rest of us, why should we cling to them?’ the Hindus are bound to ask. ‘On the contrary, we should learn from them. Governments and political parties are pandering to Muslims because the latter have become a bank of votes. We should knit ourselves into a solid bloc also.’

Posted via email from Jay’s Blogs

This entry was posted on 28. October 2009 at 03:59 and is filed under Islam, India. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.

| Print