Menu

The Kaka Kalelkar Commission

India’s first attempt to find backward classes beyond Dalits and Adivasis produced a list of 2,399 castes and communities. The government rejected the report anyway. Even the chairman, Kaka Kalelkar, doubted parts of it.

Set up 29 January 1953, under Article 340.
Report 30 March 1955.
List 2,399 castes; 837 “most backward”.
Outcome Rejected by the Centre.

Article 340: Lets the President appoint a backward classes commission.

Most backward: 837 of the 2,399 castes.

Creamy layer: Well-off OBC members, excluded in 1992.

Mandal: The Second Backward Classes Commission.

1Chapter 1: The First Backward Classes Commission

Must Know

Set up and led

  • The Kalelkar Commission is formally the First Backward Classes Commission.
  • It was set up on 29 January 1953 by a Presidential Order, under Article 340.
  • Its chairman was Kaka Kalelkar, a Gandhian writer and social reformer.

Its task

  • It had to identify which sections of society, beyond Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, were socially and educationally backward.
  • It also had to recommend steps to help them.

The report

  • The Commission submitted its report on 30 March 1955.
  • It listed 2,399 castes and communities as backward, across the country.
  • Of these, 837 were classed as “most backward”.
  • It recommended quotas in government services: 25% in Class I, 33.5% in Class II, and 40% in Classes III and IV.
  • It also recommended 70% reservation for backward-class students in technical and professional institutions.

The rejection

  • The Central Government rejected the report.
  • Its argument: the Commission had relied on caste, not objective non-caste criteria.

Remember: Kalelkar: 1953 set up, 1955 report, 2,399 castes, 837 most backward, quotas 25/33.5/40, Centre rejected it.

True or False: The Kalelkar Commission was set up under Article 340.

2Chapter 2: Inside the Report

Good to Know

How it defined “backward”

  • Low position in the traditional Hindu caste hierarchy.
  • Lack of general educational advancement.
  • Inadequate representation in government service, trade and industry.

A chairman with doubts

  • Kalelkar himself had doubts about some recommendations.
  • In his forwarding letter to the President, he expressed reservations.
  • He did not file a formal note of dissent.
  • A chairman questioning his own report is unusual.
  • It shows real internal disagreement, not unanimous certainty.

Other recommendations

  • It reviewed the existing SC and ST lists and recommended changes.
  • These went into the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1956.
  • It recommended caste-wise enumeration in the 1961 Census.
  • That was not implemented at the time.
  • It also recommended treating all women, as a group, as a backward class.

About Kaka Kalelkar

  • He lived from 1885 to 1981.
  • He was a Rajya Sabha member from 1952 to 1964.
  • He received the Padma Vibhushan in 1964.
  • See Padma Awards.

Remember: Criteria: caste rank, low education, poor representation in jobs, trade and industry.

True or False: Kalelkar filed a formal note of dissent against his own report.

3Chapter 3: The Dilemma That Stayed

Great to Know

Twenty-four years later

  • After the rejection, India waited 24 years before setting up a similar body.
  • That was the Second Backward Classes Commission, the Mandal Commission, set up in 1979.
  • Its 27% OBC quota reached the Supreme Court in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992).
  • A nine-judge Bench upheld it, by 6:3.
  • The same ruling introduced the “creamy layer”, excluding well-off OBC members.
  • It also fixed a 50% general ceiling on reservations, still debated today.
  • See V.P. Singh and the Mandal Commission Controversy and Revisiting the 50% Cap on Reservation.

Different numbers, same question

  • Kalelkar’s 25/33.5/40 percentages differ from the familiar 27% OBC quota that came from Mandal.
  • Both reports tried to answer the same question.
  • Is caste a valid measure of disadvantage, or just one proxy among several?
  • That dilemma was never fully settled.

An idea that came back

Think it through: Think it through: why reject a report on caste?

The Centre said caste alone is a weak test. A rich family and a poor one can share a caste. The Mandal Commission later added the creamy layer to fix exactly this gap.

True or False: Kalelkar recommended 70% reservation in technical and professional institutions.

Quick Q&A

  • Commission set up? 29 January 1953.
  • Report date? 30 March 1955.
  • Castes listed? 2,399.
  • Most backward? 837.
  • Mandal Commission set up? 1979.

MCQ on Kalelkar Commission

Question 1 of 1

Who was the first Chairman of the Backward Classes Commission (the Kalelkar Commission)?

Question 1 of 1

The Kaka Kalelkar Commission, India’s First Backward Classes Commission, was constituted in January 1953 under which Article of the Constitution?

Question 1 of 1

The Kalelkar Commission submitted its report on 30 March 1955, listing how many castes and communities as backward?

Question 1 of 1

What was the Central Government’s stated reason for rejecting the Kalelkar Commission’s report?

Question 1 of 1

What was unusual about Kaka Kalelkar’s own response to his Commission’s final report?

Question 1 of 1

How many years passed between the Kalelkar Commission’s report and the setting up of the Second Backward Classes Commission (the Mandal Commission)?

Answered 0 of 3 checks.

Was this helpful?

Beyond the answer

    Leave a Reply

    [privacy-do-not-sell-link]

    Discover more from MCQ Questions

    Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

    Continue reading

    ✨Ask doubt
    ✨ Ask a Question AI×
    [privacy-do-not-sell-link]