POLITICAL GRIEVANCES 419
TABLE V
Population Ratio as Compared with Ratio in the I.C.S.
| Community | Actual Ratio in the I.C.S. excluding Europeans | Population Ratio | Excess + Defficiency — of Service Ratio as compared with Population Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Hindus … 2. Muslims … 3. Indian Christians … 4. Anglo-Indians … 5. Parsis … 6. Sikhs … 7. Scheduled Castes … 8. Others … | 63.2 19.2 4.0 1.5 1.5 2.0 …… 8.0 | 50.0 23.6 1.0 .03 0.3 1.3 13.5 …… | + 13.2 — 4.4 + 3.0 + 1.47 + 1.47 + 0.7 –13.5 …… |
- From these tables the following conclusions stand out as incontrovertible facts:—
(1) All communities have made a fair degree of progress towards getting their apportioned share of representation in the I.C.S. The only exception is the unfortunate community of the Scheduled Castes who have made no progress at all.
(2) Some communities have secured a degree of representation in the I.C.S. much in excess of their population ratio. This is noticeable in the case of the Hindus. Excluding the share of the Europeans which is 50% and which must be excluded for comparing the relative position of the Indians the Hindus have got 63% of the I.C.S. appointments when the ratio of their population to the total population is only
50%. They are enjoying an excess of 13%.
(3) Nomination was intended only to correct the inequities of competition. Yet some communities have been given the benefit of nomination although it has been able to secure a very large of the I.C.S. appointments by competition and who do not need and cannot claim the benefit of nomination. This is undoubtedly the case with the Hindus. Between 1920-1942 the Hindus were able to secure 332 out of 435 that were filled by Indians by competition, and yet