For years, the major dalit parties in Tamil Nadu – Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK) representing paraiyars and Puthiya Tamilagam (PT) that represents pallars (who, along with six other sub-sects, have been called devendrakula vellalars) – have had an uneasy truce. They rarely criticised each other in public forums, though they do not see eye to eye on many issues. The relatively less powerful Athi Tamizhar Peravai, which represents arunthathiyars too has desisted from taking on either VCK or PT.
A recent Supreme Court order upholding sub classification of scheduled castes and validating 3% reservation for arunthathiyars within the 18 % quota for scheduled castes, has stirred the pot. PT president K Krishnaswamy has accused VCK chief Thol Thirumavalavan of adopting double standards on reservation; Athi Tamizhar Peravai has criticised both VCK and PT for opposing the internal quota.
The bitterness has seeped down to the cadres, triggering debates on the implications of internal quota for arunthathiyars on other dalit communities.
Dalit analysts fear the 15-year-old reservation for arunthathiyars might not augur well for dalit unity in Tamil Nadu.
Krishnaswamy has been the loudest voice against internal quota, which he says is a ploy to divide scheduled castes. He called the report of the Justice Janarthanan commission (formed to submit a report on the status of arunthathiyars in TN) halfbaked. “The commission report was prepared without due diligence and submitted without supporting statistical data on the backwardness of arunthathiyars,” says Krishnaswamy.

Arunthathiyars, at the bottom of the social pyramid, are found largely in the western districts, while devendrakula vellalars are spread across the southern districts and paraiyars are prevalent in the northern districts. Justice Janarthanan commission said arunthathiyars account for 16% of dalit population and recommended a proportionate reservation, which was granted by the Special Reservation Act passed in 2009.
Krishnaswamy argues that Thirumavalavan approached SC with a review petition on the verdict upholding internal quota, though he claims to support the arunthathiyar quota. In response, Thirumavalavan reiterated that VCK is not against internal reservation for arunthathiyars; it only opposes compartmentalisation of dalits. The review petition was not against the 3% quota for arunthathiyar, but against the verdict which gives room for state govts to divide dalits as per their whims, he says.
Athi Tamizhar Peravai founder R Athiyaman is angry at both. “They have enjoyed the benefits of reservation all these years, now they are not ready to forgo the benefits,” he says. He points out that in 2008 when the commission began its study, there was not even one arunthathiyar among the 32 dalit IPS officers, though they constituted 2.8 % of TN population according to the 2001 census. There was no vice-chancellor, no syndicate member or senate member from our community, he says.
Reservation, however, enabled arunthathiyar youth to climb the ladder. “Now 70 arunthathiyars join MBBS every year. They have become engineers, teachers, policemen and village administrative officers,” says Athiyaman. Still, arunthathiyars have a long way to go. Other dalit communities often infringe on the 3% quota. In university postings, if no qualified arunthathiyar has applied, the seat goes to a parayar or devendrakula vellalar,” he says. At present, there are only three arunthathiyar MLAs, while more than 20 legislators each belong to devendrakula vellalar and parayar sects.

Some dalit activists say the internal quota has flaws. In the roster system (where castes are assigned for all the posts that fall vacant) followed in universities, the first post is assigned as general, where anyone can compete. It is followed by SC, MBC and BC. When the internal quota was implemented, SC (arunthathiyar) was brought to the second slot, pushing SC to the seventh slot. “The problem is when there are only three or four postings, it doesn’t come to an SC,” says a senior academician who doesn’t want to be named.
Since each department in the university is considered a separate unit, the roster system needs to be followed individually by the departments. “If 10 university departments invite applications for four posts each, arunthathiyars get 10 posts, while other SCs get nothing,” says J Balasubramaniam, associate professor at Madurai Kamaraj university. “Arunthathiyars can apply for an SC post, but not vice versa.” He points out that when Muslims were given internal quota carving out from BC reservation, the slot assigned for BC in the roster system was not disturbed. BC retained its fourth slot while BC (Muslims) were assigned the 11th slot.
VCK and PT leaders say they are against any rift among dalits. “We do not want anyone to deprive them of their share in postings. Let arunthathiyars have 3%, but the remaining 15% should be protected and given to other dalit communities,” says Krishnaswamy.
Dalit scholar Karthikeyan Damodaran says it is important to provide preferential treatment to arunthathiyars who are mostly landless and without political backing. “But the way reservation is being implemented denies others equal opportunity,” he says.
He says the emergence of dalit parties in the 1990s was an outcome of a counter hegemonic discourse against Dravidian parties. “But now the dalit parties are fully co-opted by Dravidian parties. This quota is another ploy to nullify their political assertion and mobilisation. This is not good for the community which is already marginalised,” he says.
VCK general secretary D Ravikumar says the way forward is to form a commission to collect statistical evidence on the impact of internal reservation and work out changes that need to be done to the system.