Now, Dr. Deshmukh suggests that we should incorporate in this article 286 amendment No, 86, adding “or for the purpose of bringing about a just and fair representation, of all classes in Public Services of the Union or a State,” and his amendment No. 88, adding, “nothing in clause (3) of this article shall require a Public Service Commission to be consulted as respects the manner in which appointments are made and posts reserved for purpose of giving representation to various classes according to their numbers in the Union or a State.” Unfortunately, this provision if accepted by the House, will militate against what the House has already adopted in article 10 providing for reservation only to backward classes. I wish article 10 had been adopted in a different manner, but article 10 having been adopted already in the form in which it was adopted, it is too late now, unless that is revised so to make a provision in this fashion, firstly to give representation to all classes as well as the second one; otherwise it will conflict with article 10 (1) (2) and (3) which we already adopted. I for one would not mind even weightage being given to those people who are really backward for the transitional period, but a constitutional provision of this nature in this article would militate against the article which we have already adopted. It can be safely left to be regulated by Parliament. I am sure the future Parliament in this country will deal fairly and squarely with all communities, and there should be no difficulty about leaving the matter of making provision in this regard to the future Parliament.
