The Controversial Role of Liaquat Ali Khan in Establishing the Quota System and Alleged Discrimination Against Migrants in Pakistan

Liaquat Ali Khan, Pakistan’s first Prime Minister (1947–1951), is a towering figure in the country’s early history, revered as Quaid-e-Millat (Leader of the Nation) and Shaheed-e-Millat (Martyr of the Nation). His contributions to consolidating the newly formed state of Pakistan, including laying the groundwork for its administrative and constitutional framework, are widely acknowledged. However, his role in introducing the quota system for civil services in 1948 and allegations of discriminatory practices against migrants (Muhajirs) in job allocations within his ministries have sparked considerable debate. This article critically examines Liaquat Ali Khan’s policies, focusing on the quota system’s origins, its implications for urban Sindh, particularly Karachi, and the contentious claims of discrimination against migrants.

The Quota System: Origins and Objectives

The quota system in Pakistan was introduced in September 1948 under Liaquat Ali Khan’s administration to ensure equitable representation of various regions and communities in the federal civil services, reflecting the country’s diverse demographic composition. At the time, Pakistan faced significant challenges in integrating its geographically and ethnically diverse regions, particularly after the partition of British India in 1947. The system aimed to address historical imbalances in representation, especially for underrepresented groups, and to foster national unity in a fragile, nascent state.

The 1948 quota policy allocated positions in the Central Superior Services (CSS) based on regional population shares. Notably, it reserved 42% of seats for East Bengal (which had 56.75% of Pakistan’s population), 24% for West Punjab (28% population), and 15% for migrants from India. Karachi, with a population of approximately 1.3% of the total, was allocated a separate 2% quota, while the remaining 17% was distributed among Sindh, Balochistan, the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP), and other tribal areas. In 1949, the policy was refined to allocate 20% of seats on merit, reducing the share for Sindh, Balochistan, and NWFP to 15%.

Liaquat’s primary motivation was to increase representation for East Bengalis, who, despite being the numerical majority, were significantly underrepresented in the civil services due to educational and economic disparities inherited from colonial rule. The quota system was also intended to provide opportunities for migrants (Muhajirs), who had left their homes in India to settle in Pakistan, particularly in urban Sindh. However, the implementation of this system and its perceived biases fueled controversies, especially in urban centers like Karachi, where migrants formed a significant population.

Allegations of Discrimination Against Migrants

While the quota system was designed to promote inclusivity, it faced criticism for allegedly discriminating against certain groups, particularly Urdu-speaking migrants in urban Sindh. Karachi, which became the federal capital and a hub for Muhajirs, saw rapid demographic changes post-partition, with migrants constituting a substantial portion of its population. Despite this, the 2% quota allocated to Karachi and the 15% for migrants were seen as inadequate by many in the Muhajir community, given their significant presence and contributions to Pakistan’s creation.

Context of Alleged Discrimination

1. Urban-Rural Divide in Sindh: The quota system did not initially distinguish between urban and rural Sindh, subsuming Sindh’s share within the broader 17% allocation for multiple regions. This lack of specificity marginalized urban centers like Karachi, where Muhajirs were concentrated, and favored rural areas with different demographic profiles. Critics argued that this structure disadvantaged educated Muhajirs, who were often better qualified for civil service roles due to their urban backgrounds and access to education in pre-partition India.
2. Dominance of Punjabis in Key Posts: Between 1947 and 1958, key government positions, including the prime ministership and ministerial portfolios like education, information, and refugee rehabilitation, were predominantly held by Punjabis. This perception of Punjabi dominance fueled resentment among Muhajirs, who felt their sacrifices during the Pakistan Movement were not adequately rewarded. Liaquat Ali Khan, himself a Muhajir from Karnal (Punjab, India), was accused of failing to advocate strongly for his community’s interests, possibly to avoid perceptions of favoritism.
3. Limited Representation in Sindh: The Muhajir community in Karachi and Hyderabad expected greater representation in federal and provincial services, given their role in the Muslim League and the Pakistan Movement. However, the quota system’s structure, combined with Liaquat’s focus on national integration, meant that their share remained limited. This led to accusations that Liaquat’s policies indirectly discriminated against Muhajirs by prioritizing other regions, particularly East Bengal.
4. Administrative Challenges: The influx of millions of refugees into urban Sindh strained resources and administrative capacity. Liaquat’s government prioritized refugee rehabilitation, but the allocation of jobs and resources often appeared uneven. Muhajirs in Karachi, despite their educational qualifications, faced competition from other groups, leading to perceptions of systemic exclusion from ministerial and bureaucratic roles.

Evidence of Discrimination

Concrete evidence of intentional discrimination by Liaquat Ali Khan against Muhajirs in his ministries is limited and largely anecdotal. The quota system’s design was rooted in demographic proportionality rather than ethnic or linguistic bias, and Liaquat’s inclusion of a 15% quota for migrants suggests an intent to accommodate Muhajirs. However, the system’s implementation revealed structural flaws:

• The 2% quota for Karachi was disproportionately low compared to its population growth post-partition, which reached around one million by 1951.
• The lack of separate quotas for urban Sindh meant that Muhajirs competed with other groups within the broader Sindh allocation, reducing their chances of securing jobs.
• Posts in Liaquat’s ministries, such as finance, defense, and foreign affairs (which he personally oversaw), were often filled by Punjabis or individuals with pre-partition bureaucratic experience, sidelining Muhajirs who lacked similar networks.

Critics, particularly from the Muhajir community, argue that Liaquat’s policies reflected a pragmatic but flawed approach that prioritized national unity over equitable representation for urban Sindh. Supporters, however, contend that Liaquat operated under immense pressure to stabilize a new state and that the quota system was a necessary compromise to address East Bengal’s underrepresentation.

Urban Sindh’s Political Landscape and the Quota System

Urban Sindh, particularly Karachi, was the epicenter of Muhajir political consciousness during Liaquat’s tenure. The city’s rapid transformation into a Muhajir-majority hub post-partition amplified expectations of political and economic dominance. The quota system’s perceived inadequacies contributed to a sense of alienation among Muhajirs, laying the groundwork for later ethnic tensions between Muhajirs and Sindhis, as seen in the 1972 language riots.

The 1948 quota system also intersected with Sindh’s broader political dynamics. The separation of Karachi from Sindh as a federal territory in 1948, a decision made under Liaquat’s government, was deeply resented by Sindhi nationalists, who saw it as an attempt to dilute their provincial autonomy. This move, while administratively justified, further complicated Muhajir-Sindhi relations, as Muhajirs became associated with central authority. The quota system’s failure to address urban Sindh’s unique demographic realities exacerbated these tensions, setting the stage for future ethnic and linguistic conflicts.

Liaquat’s Intentions and Legacy

Liaquat Ali Khan’s introduction of the quota system was driven by the need to balance competing regional interests in a newly formed state. His focus on East Bengal’s representation reflected a strategic effort to prevent the marginalization of Pakistan’s largest province, which later seceded as Bangladesh in 1971. Similarly, the inclusion of a migrant quota demonstrated an acknowledgment of Muhajirs’ contributions to Pakistan’s creation. However, the system’s design and implementation were criticized for overlooking urban Sindh’s demographic and political significance.

Allegations of discrimination against Muhajirs in Liaquat’s ministries are partly rooted in the broader context of post-partition challenges, including resource scarcity and bureaucratic inertia. While Liaquat’s personal bias against Muhajirs is not substantiated by historical records, his government’s failure to address urban Sindh’s grievances contributed to perceptions of neglect. As a Muhajir himself, Liaquat may have avoided overt favoritism to maintain national cohesion, but this caution inadvertently alienated sections of his own community.

Liaquat’s legacy in this regard is complex. The quota system, extended and modified by subsequent governments (e.g., under Yahya Khan and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto), remains a contentious issue in Pakistan, with urban Sindh’s Muhajirs continuing to view it as a barrier to merit-based opportunities. The system’s origins under Liaquat highlight the challenges of nation-building in a diverse state, where policies aimed at inclusion can inadvertently foster division.

Conclusion

Liaquat Ali Khan’s role in establishing the quota system in 1948 was a pivotal moment in Pakistan’s administrative history, aimed at ensuring regional representation in a diverse and fragile state. However, the system’s implementation, particularly its limited provisions for urban Sindh and Muhajirs, sparked allegations of discrimination, especially in job allocations within Liaquat’s ministries. While evidence of intentional bias is scarce, the quota system’s structural flaws and the dominance of Punjabis in key posts fueled Muhajir grievances, contributing to their sense of marginalization in urban Sindh. Liaquat’s policies reflect the dilemmas of early nation-building, where efforts to unify a diverse polity often led to unintended consequences. The quota system’s legacy continues to shape Pakistan’s ethnic and political landscape, underscoring the enduring challenges of balancing equity and merit in governance.