Historically Muslims have been less educated than Hindus in modern education since the colonial times, and therefore were in smaller number in the civil service even during the British raj, except in U.P. and Hyderabad state. The exodus of educated Muslims to Pakistan contributed to the further decline of Muslims in the civil service. As the educational backwardness of Muslims persists even after independence, fewer Muslims are in the government jobs.

Like other Indians, most Muslims, some65 percent (as against roughly 68 percent national average) live in rural areas, and most are occupied in agriculture and related fields. Only a microscopic percentage of the total national population is employed by the state. Educationally, more Muslims are illiterate than is the national average. Within Muslims, a higher percentage of women are illiterate. Because a higher percentage of Muslims are illiterate, most do not even qualify to compete for the higher echelons of the state jobs, much less hired. Since most government hiring is through competitive examinations held by roll numbers rather than names, the likelihood of discrimination on the basis of Muslim-sounding names is absent. However, where interviews are involved, it is possible to discriminate against not merely Muslims, but by caste as well since the Hindu society itself is divided by caste and subcaste, not to speak of language and region. If the absence of Muslims in the civil service is attributed to lack of education, what accounts forthe absence of Muslims as peons in say, the Central Secretariat in New Delhi?

In the armed forces, before independence Muslims constituted around 35 percent of the total. Today, guestimates number them around two percent out of a total of close to a million. Why so few Muslims? Most of the 35 percent Muslims in the army were recruited from Punjab and nearby areas. Since those regions are no longer in India, there are fewer Muslims, although it is possible that some Muslims were not recruited in the early decades of independence due to doubts about their loyalty. But that era has long been over. Since 1989, there is a policy to recruit soldiers from around the nation by rejecting the theory of ``martial races''. If this policy is followed in letter and spirit, there is no reason why Muslims will be left out. However, the Muslims' educational backwardness would still be an impediment to commissioned ranks recruitment, which is through competitive exams. Recruitment to the air force and the navy has alwaysbeen through exams and is unlikely that Muslims were rejected merely on account of their faith.

In the police and the paramilitary, the story is different. In U.P. and Hyderabad State, Muslims were ``represented'' in the police in larger than their population percentage. Congress chief ministers in both states did in fact curtail Muslim recruitment in the police in the early years of freedom. But again that era is well past us, much like the excesses of the Evacuee Property law enforced between 1947 and 56, when Muslims' immovable properties were seized by the state.

It is unreasonable to expect that each religious group will be "represented" in each service/occupation in exact proportion to its population. This is not say that there are no issues that are Muslim-specific and need to be solved. The preservation and perpetuation of Urdu is of special concern to those whose mother tongue it happens to be, even as it interests some whose native language it is not. The protection of Muslim personal law andmosques are obvious issues dear to most Muslims. Yet, it would be erroneous to claim that Muslims have any economic and educational interest different from or in competition with the rest of the nation.

The writer is a scholar at MIT, Cambridge, US