2 days ago
Decode politics: In poll-bound Bihar, calls for domicile reservation grow. Why they are difficult to ignore
Ahead of the Bihar polls, an old issue has come to haunt the Nitish Kumar-led NDA government. On June 5, the Bihar Student Union, an umbrella body of several student organisations, led a protest in Patna demanding domicile reservation in government jobs.
Bihar has an unemployment rate of 3.9% as per the latest NITI Aayog estimates, higher than the national average of 3.2%. Many young people in the state rely on government jobs, which have been marred with irregularities in the recent past. Hence, jobs are a politically sensitive issue, with resonance ahead of the polls.
Those demanding domicile reservation argue that candidates from outside the state are taking away jobs that belong to youths of Bihar. Their slogan 'Vote de Bihari, naukari le bahri (Biharis vote, outsiders take jobs)' is fast gaining momentum as the elections draw closer.
Under domicile reservation, the government of a particular state reserves a portion of government jobs or educational seats for its residents, the idea being to prioritise local candidates or protect local interests in competitive job markets.
While Bihar does not have a general domicile-based reservation policy for government jobs, the NDA government claims that most of the recruits in recent government exams have been Bihar residents. Additionally, around a fortnight back, the Bihar government announced reservation of 4% of all government jobs for persons with disabilities from the state.
In December 2020, following a series of protests, the state government had briefly introduced a domicile rule for school teacher recruitment. But it was withdrawn in June 2023 by the short-lived Mahagathbandhan alliance that subsequently came to power, allowing candidates from any Indian state to apply for the teaching positions.
Then Bihar education minister Chandrashekar Yadav had cited 'vacant seats for quality mathematics and science teachers' as the reason, while bureaucrats had mentioned 'constitutional provisions and Supreme Court rulings' for the decision.
The demand for domicile reservation flows from Bihar's economic and social challenges. As per a NITI Aayog report titled 'Macro and Fiscal Landscape of the State of Bihar', published in March 2025, Bihar's economy is predominantly agrarian, with 49.6% its workforce engaged in agriculture between 2022-23. Only 5.7% of the state has manufacturing jobs — one of the lowest shares in India. Service and construction jobs make up the rest of the jobs pie and constitute 26% and 18.4% of the workforce respectively.
The lack of private-sector jobs makes government positions highly coveted, as they offer stability and benefits. Though the government has tried to expand hiring in recent years, demand far outstrips supply.
They are demanding an official domicile quota with 100% reservation for Bihar natives in primary teacher recruitment and at least 90% reservation in other state jobs for candidates with valid long-term Bihar domicile certificates.
The protesters argue that neighbouring states already protect the opportunities of their locals and that the youth of Bihar is competing unfairly with outsiders for limited opportunities. This, they argue, results in a vicious cycle of unemployment and migration from Bihar.
State policies on domicile reservation vary.
Uttarakhand reserves all Class III and IV jobs for candidates who have lived in the state for at least 15 years. Maharashtra also requires a similar 15-year domicile and fluency in Marathi for many government posts, effectively prioritising locals. Nagaland, Meghalaya and Arunachal Pradesh have special constitutional provisions that reserve large fractions of local government jobs for indigenous tribes. Jammu and Kashmir had similar reservations before the abrogation of its special status in 2019. On June 2, the Central government notified 85% reservation for the residents of Ladakh.
In 2023, the Jharkhand Assembly passed a Bill to reserve all government jobs in the Class III and IV category for domiciles based on the 1932 land record. But the governor returned it, citing constitutional issues, and it has not yet been implemented.
Article 16(2) of the Constitution guarantees equality of opportunity in public employment and prohibits discrimination based on place of birth or residence. Article 16(3) allows only Parliament, not state governments, to prescribe residency requirements for specific posts.
Besides, the Supreme Court has consistently ruled against state-level domicile reservations, emphasising national unity. In the Pradeep Jain vs Union of India case (1984), the Court held that 'sons-of-the-soil' policies are unconstitutional as they undermine equal opportunity.
Exceptions exist under Article 371 for states like Nagaland to protect interests of the tribal population of the state.
The Nitish Kumar-led NDA government has not yet given a direct public statement on the domicile protests. However, it has spoken out against this earlier. Last month, JD(U) leader Manish Kumar Verma said a domicile reservation policy would 'go against the Constitution', and could prompt retaliatory measures from other states and affect the millions of Bihari migrants working elsewhere. Instead, Verma said, the government was focusing on large-scale recruitment drives to address unemployment.
Both RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav and Jan Suraaj head Prashant Kishor have, however, backed the demand. Yadav has even promised 100% reservation across all jobs if the RJD comes to power in the coming polls.
