We wanted a notion of religion-based treatment to go away, but then you create policies and schemes based on religion. It will only deeply on the sense of religious identity, from the consumption of public goods prospective, for example we have this, first point talking about, this Sachar committee report and as a result of various schemes were created, targeting minority community. One of them says, that wherever there are minority constant treated districts, it’s called MCD particular region. They have some geographical specification for that, if the percentage of minority is greater than twenty-five or something, then there are special schemes which include, things like focus on creating roads, streetlight, easy access to loans in that area and so on.
Multiple issues with this. First of all, if you creates scheme targeting concentrated areas, people are going concentrate more and easy access to resources there and secondly, it deep on the money, something like a road, or a streetlight or bank loan is a public good. There is no religious identity or a religious tagging. Each of us based on needs and whatever other non-religious criteria should be equally qualify to apply for that and get in. But this is specifically targeting. That’s so. It can only deep on the sense communal identity in the country. If we go this round, I think that’s the bigger problem with this approach.
