In UP, it is more common for newspapers to publish reports about Thakur lobby, Kayastha group or Pandits power going up or down in a department. Now in Madhya Pradesh also we are seeing this trend.
Sometimes it is just a coincidence that a head of department and a few more officials in senior positions share the same caste or surname, and journalists draw this conclusion.
One can't deny that there is a possibility though of sometimes a lobby getting stronger in this way. However, it is wrong only if this lobby helps particular group of people or is biased in favour of some, at the expense of others.
In Europe, America and Middle East, caste is no issue. As Hinduism is the only religion which has institutionalized the 'varna vyavastha', this style of journalim can't be found in newspapers elsewhere. On the left is a report in Sandhya Prakash, the evening paper's diary column, 'Mantrayala Ajkal'.
It is a diary item that says the 'Lala lobby dominates'. The Lala word here means Kayasthas particularly those with surnames like Saxena, Srivastava, Nigam, Mathur, Kulshreshtha, Asthana and Khare amongst few others. The paper says that the Punjabi lobby has lost out to Kayasthas.
As Kayasthas were traditionally more educated than others and learning was given importance in their households, their percentage in government jobs was always much higher than other castes. Similar is the case of Brahmins also.
If there are more Shrivastavas in district administration, State government departments and police, it is understandable. This is the sort of 'chatkhare-daar' news that is read with delight and chuckle in bureaucratic circles, as wells as the general reader.
Of course, there are regional lobbies also like Bihari lobby or North Indian-South Indian lobby. So once again we are back to the same question. Does it affect working in the bureaucratic circles or creates a nexus or caucus to favour particular group.
What's your view!
