Do caste-based reservations provide incentives to remain backward ?

A newspaper editorial discusses the issues concerning caste and religion based quotas for education and jobs. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/opinion/edit-page/Beyond-Quotas/articleshow/5553034.cms . Although I am aware of the fact that certain ethnic groups have lower socioeconomic status and are victims of varying levels of prejudice and discrimination, my own observation has been that reservations do little to raise the socioeconomic status of these people , and instead give them incentives for them to remain backward.
I have observed , that among beneficiaries of the caste-based quotas , most of the families have 5 or 6 children. ( even in large cities like Delhi ) Surely having so many children in this age can be a recipe for lifelong headache . The prevalence of large families among the reservation beneficiaries can be explained by the fact that reservations make it quite easy for children of such families to get government jobs , so the parents need not worry about the future of their large family. Isn't the reservation system providing incentive for beneficiaries to have large families, denting the government efforts in family planning drive ? A little thought would also make it clear that these people dont really benefit much from the reservations, since the benefits of better jobs are neutralised ( or perhaps surpassed ? ) by the harmful effects of a large number of dependents. I wonder if such people would attain the same level of prosperity with not-so-good jobs but with lesser number of chidren .
This raises the possibility that in a rapidly developing India, such people would remain socially and economically backward , instead of realising their full potential . Of course, critics have alleged for decades that the reservation system has been established for achieving political ends, and not for empowering suppressed people