How the Matang reservation debate is reshaping Maharashtra's Dalit politics

Social conflict has once again erupted in Maharashtra over the demand for sub-categorisation within the Scheduled Castes (SC) category. The Matang community has intensified its agitation for sub-categorisation, while legislators from various parties within the category have taken a firm stand against it. Over the past two decades, demands for reservation and the issue of sub-categorisation among various castes have remained central to political discourse in Maharashtra. Although the Supreme Court has empowered state governments to implement sub-categorisation within Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe reservations, the Maharashtra government faces opposition from legislators across party lines and various Dalit organisations regarding this decision. But how do electoral arithmetic and the politics of pressure tactics adversely affect the decentralisation of power? In the context of intra-category disparities within the Scheduled Castes and the equitable distribution of resources, how are issues such as cultural politics, caste identity, and political polarisation shaping the policy of social justice?

Marginalisation of the Matang community

In 2003, the then state government established the 'Krantivir Lahuji Salve Matang Samaj Study Commission' to consider the demands of the Matang community. The commission examined appointments to posts reserved for Scheduled Castes across various government departments. It highlighted the dominance of the Mahar and Chambhar communities in reserved positions at all levels of the administration. Available data indicates that the Matang community has lagged behind regarding government posts across all employment categories. For example, according to statistics from the Lahuji Salve Commission, based on data received from 22 municipal corporations in the state, out of 21,066 posts reserved for Scheduled Castes, the Mahar community secured 12,299 positions and the Chambhar community secured 3,578, whereas the Matang community received opportunities for administrative employment in only 1,897 posts. These figures demonstrate that both the Mahar community (which has a larger population than the Matang community) and the Chambhar community (which has a smaller population) secured greater representation.

History of categorisation demand

In 2003, the then Maharashtra government constituted the 'Krantivir Lahuji Salve Matang Samaj Study Commission'. The mandate of this commission was to conduct an in-depth study of the backwardness of the Matang community and allied sub-castes in the state and to make recommendations for their comprehensive development. The study report was submitted in 2008. Based on the backwardness of the Matang community and allied sub-castes, the commission recommended granting a separate 5 per cent reservation to the Matang community through a process of sub-categorisation. Since then, the Matang community has been continuously agitating across the state to press for this demand of sub-categorisation.

In 2024, responding favourably to the Matang community's demand, the state government established the ‘Justice Anant Badar Committee’, a one-member judicial commission. This commission submitted its report regarding the social and educational backwardness of the Scheduled sub-castes to the state government in March 2026. However, the report has not yet been made public, as the government has issued instructions to invite objections regarding the matter. The government is facing a dilemma, as legislators from all political parties are demanding that the report be made public immediately and that the process of sub-categorisation be halted. Despite the Supreme Court's approval of sub-classification, various Dalit organisations in the state have launched strong opposition to it.

Mahar and Matang: Divergent social paths

Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar belonged to the Mahar community. On October 14, 1956, at Deekshabhoomi in Nagpur, he embraced Buddhism along with millions of his followers. On that day, millions of Ambedkar's followers renounced Hinduism and embraced Buddhism. Following this historic event, hundreds of thousands of Ambedkar's followers in Maharashtra embraced Buddhism. This was not merely a religious conversion; it marked the starting point of a new struggle for education, social equality, human dignity, and political rights. The movement instilled a sense of self-respect within the Dalit community and initiated a new wave of social transformation.

During the period of Ambedkar's conversion movement, some followers from the Matang and Chambhar communities also embraced Buddhism alongside the Mahar community. However, the extent and social scope of conversion varied across these communities. Due to their distinct historical, cultural, and spiritual legacies, significant sections of the Matang and Chambhar communities remain connected to Hindu traditions, deities, and religious practices, a fact to which the Mahar community, and indeed the Dalit movement at large, takes strong objection. Given the history of untouchability and denial of temple entry, following Ambedkar’s path of conversion, viewed as the first step toward social advancement, remains a central issue for the Dalit movement.

The socio-economic structure of the landless and resource-poor Matang community has historically been rooted in traditional occupations. Furthermore, the community has played a vital role as artists within religious and folk traditions. Consequently, the economic and cultural practices of the Matang community appear historically intertwined with various religious activities of the Hindu tradition. This leads to criticism from within the Dalit movement: that the Matang community, despite experiencing untouchability, acts as a key bearer of Hindu religious and cultural traditions. This lies at the heart of the contention.

Identity crisis of Matangs

Inspired by Ambedkar, his followers established the Republican Party of India (RPI) in 1957. Subsequently, the party split due to leadership disputes and organisational conflicts. However, this political movement produced several prominent Dalit leaders, such as Rajabhau Khobragade, R.S. Gavai, Ramdas Athawale, and Prakash Ambedkar. All these leaders hail from the Mahar community, highlighting the long-standing influence and role of 'Mahar' leadership in Dalit politics in Maharashtra.

Under the leadership of Ambedkar, a comprehensive movement encompassing education, organisation, and political representation emerged within the Mahar community; this movement remains their greatest strength to this day. However, a similar process of social transformation did not take place within the Matang community. Ambedkar's influence helped overcome the fragmentation within the Mahar community; their unity regarding social issues is a significant asset. Educational progress and political representation have accelerated the process of social development for the Mahar community.

In contrast, Krantivir Lahuji Vastad Salve and Lokshahir Annabhau Sathe stand as the two primary pillars of inspiration and identity for the Matang community. Yet, the community has failed to achieve the expected level of unity to leverage the legacy of these great figures for educational advancement. Nevertheless, the Matang community does appear united around the names of Sathe and Salve regarding the issue of the sub-categorisation of Scheduled Castes.

The politics behind reservation policy

The Mahar community has long been considered a traditional Congress vote bank. To secure an alternative voter base to the Mahars or Neo-Buddhists, the BJP and Shiv Sena, which established themselves in the state during the 1990s, empowered leadership within the Matang and Chambhar communities by leveraging the issue of Hindutva. Since the 1990s, the Matang and Chambhar communities who adhere to Hindu traditions have increasingly become traditional voters for the BJP and Shiv Sena. This led to more pronounced political polarisation and a split in votes among Scheduled Caste voters. That is why Dalit movements allege that the BJP has brought the issue of sub-categorisation to the forefront to strengthen its hold over voters from the Matang community.

However, the fact that the Congress opposes sub-categorisation of SC reservations in Maharashtra, despite having implemented it in Congress-ruled Telangana and Karnataka, and dismisses the BJP's decision merely as a calculation for potential votes, relegates the discourse on the decentralisation of power to a secondary position. Viewing the decentralisation of power as a potential source of division within Scheduled Castes indicates that the discourse surrounding our reservation policy has become centred on power dynamics. Consequently, addressing imbalances in representation becomes a difficult task for any ruling party.

As the long-standing social, educational, and administrative backlog faced by the Matang community is being portrayed merely as a byproduct of Hindutva politics, the issue of power decentralisation might well be sidelined. Various political parties are determining their stance by considering the 'political nuisance value' of communities that oppose sub-categorisation. This makes it evident that when discussing reservation policies, political parties prioritise their social support base and political interests rather than adopting a policy-driven approach.