Quick Links
Quick Links
UPSC Exams
Latest Update
Coaching
UPSC Current Affairs
Syllabus
UPSC Notes
Previous Year Papers
UPSC Mains Previous Year Question Papers Last 25 Years UPSC Prelims Question Papers Last 10 Years UPSC Question Papers UPSC CSE Prelims 2025 Question Paper UPSC Mains 2024 Model Answers UPSC 2024 Question Papers UPSC 2023 Question Papers UPSC 2022 Question Papers UPSC 2021 Question Papers UPSC 2020 Question Papers UPSC 2019 Question Papers UPSC 2018 Question Papers UPSC 2017 Question Papers UPSC 2016 Question Papers UPSC 2015 Question Papers UPSC 2014 Question Papers UPSC CSAT Question Papers UPSC IFS Previous Year Paper UPSC Assistant Labour Commissioner Previous Question Year Papers UPSC Combined Geo Scientist Previous Year Paper UPSC APFC Previous Year Question Papers UPSC CMS Previous Year Question Paper UPSC EPFO Previous Year Paper UPSC Air Safety Officer Previous Year Papers UPSC SO Steno Previous Year Paper UPSC IES ISS Previous Year Question Papers
Mock Tests
UPSC Editorial
Bilateral Ties
Albania India Relations India Algeria Relations Andorra India Relations India Angola Relations India Antigua Barbuda Relations India Argentina Relations Austria India Relations India Azerbaijan Relations Bahamas India Relations India Bahrain Relations Barbados India Relations India Belarus Relations Belgium India Relations Belize India Relations Benin India Relations Bolivia India Relations India Bosnia Herzegovina Relations India Botswana Relations Brazil India Relations Brunei India Relations Bulgaria India Relations Burundi India Relations Cabo Verde India Relations India Cambodia Relations India Cameroon Relations Canada India Relations India Cayman Islands Relations India Central African Republic Relations India Chad Relations Chile India Relations India Colombia Relations India Comoros Relations India Democratic Republic Of The Congo Relations India Republic Of The Congo Relations India Cook Islands Relations India Costa Rica Relations India Ivory Coast Relations India Croatia Relations India Cyprus Relations India Czech Republic Relations India Djibouti Relations India Dominica Relations India Dominican Republic Relations India Ecuador Relations India El Salvador Relations India Equatorial Guinea Relations India Eritrea Relations Estonia India Relations India Ethiopia Relations India Fiji Relations India Finland Relations India Gabon Relations India Gambia Relations India Georgia Relations Germany India Relations India Ghana Relations India Greece Relations India Grenada Relations India Guatemala Relations India Guinea Relations India Guinea Bissau Relations India Guyana Relations India Haiti Relations India Holy See Relations India Honduras Relations India Hong Kong Relations India Hungary Relations India Iceland Relations India Indonesia Relations India Iran Relations India Iraq Relations India Ireland Relations India Jamaica Relations India Kazakhstan Relations India Kenya Relations India Kingdom Of Eswatini Relations India Kiribati Relations India Kuwait Relations India Kyrgyzstan Relations India Laos Relations Latvia India Relations India Lebanon Relations India Lesotho Relations India Liberia Relations Libya India Relations Liechtenstein India Relations India Lithuania Relations India Luxembourg Relations India Macao Relations Madagascar India Relations India Malawi Relations India Mali Relations India Malta Relations India Marshall Islands Relations India Mauritania Relations India Micronesia Relations India Moldova Relations Monaco India Relations India Montenegro Relations India Montserrat Relations India Morocco Relations Mozambique India Relations India Namibia Relations India Nauru Relations Netherlands India Relations India Nicaragua Relations India Niger Relations India Nigeria Relations India Niue Relations India North Macedonia Relations Norway India Relations India Palau Relations India Panama Relations India Papua New Guinea Relations India Paraguay Relations Peru India Relations India Philippines Relations Qatar India Relations India Romania Relations Rwanda India Relations India Saint Kitts And Nevis Relations India Saint Lucia Relations India Saint Vincent And Grenadines Relations India Samoa Relations India Sao Tome And Principe Relations Saudi Arabia India Relations India Senegal Relations Serbia India Relations India Sierra Leone Relations India Singapore Relations India Slovak Republic Relations India Slovenia Relations India Solomon Islands Relations Somalia India Relations India South Sudan Relations India Spain Relations India Sudan Relations Suriname India Relations India Sweden Relations India Syria Relations India Tajikistan Relations Tanzania India Relations India Togo Relations India Tonga Islands Relations India Trinidad And Tobago Relations India Tunisia Relations India Turkmenistan Relations India Turks And Caicos Islands Relations India Tuvalu Relations India Uganda Relations India Ukraine Relations India Uae Relations India Uruguay Relations India Uzbekistan Relations India Vanuatu Relations India Venezuela Relations India British Virgin Islands Relations Yemen India Relations India Zambia Relations India Zimbabwe Relations
Books
Government Schemes
Production Linked Incentive Scheme Integrated Processing Development Scheme Rodtep Scheme Amended Technology Upgradation Fund Scheme Saathi Scheme Uday Scheme Hriday Scheme Samagra Shiksha Scheme India Nishta Scheme Stand Up India Scheme Sahakar Mitra Scheme Mdms Mid Day Meal Scheme Integrated Child Protection Scheme Vatsalya Scheme Operation Green Scheme Nai Roshni Scheme Nutrient Based Subsidy Scheme Kalia Scheme Ayushman Sahakar Scheme Nirvik Scheme Fame India Scheme Kusum Scheme Pm Svanidhi Scheme Pmvvy Scheme Pm Aasha Scheme Pradhan Mantri Mahila Shakti Kendra Scheme Pradhan Mantri Lpg Panjayat Scheme Mplads Scheme Svamitva Scheme Pat Scheme Udan Scheme Ek Bharat Shresth Bharat Scheme National Pension Scheme Ujala Scheme Operation Greens Scheme Gold Monetisation Scheme Family Planning Insurance Scheme Target Olympic Podium Scheme
Topics
NASA Space Missions
NASA Mercury-Redstone 3 (Freedom 7) Mission NASA Mercury-Redstone 4 (Liberty Bell 7) Mission NASA Mercury-Atlas 6 (Friendship 7) Mission NASA Mercury-Atlas 7 (Aurora 7) Mission NASA Mercury-Atlas 8 (Sigma 7) Mission NASA Mercury-Atlas 9 (Faith 7) Mission NASA Gemini 3 Mission NASA Gemini 4 Mission NASA Gemini 5 Mission NASA Gemini 7 Mission NASA Gemini 8 Mission NASA Gemini 9 Mission NASA Gemini 10 Mission NASA Gemini 11 Mission NASA Gemini 12 Mission NASA Apollo 1 (AS‑204) Mission NASA Apollo 7 Mission NASA Apollo 8 Mission NASA Apollo 9 Mission NASA Apollo 10 Mission NASA Apollo 11 Mission NASA Apollo 12 Mission NASA Apollo 13 Mission NASA Apollo 14 Mission NASA Apollo 15 Mission NASA Apollo 16 Mission NASA Apollo 17 Mission NASA Skylab Orbital Workshop Mission NASA Skylab 2 Mission NASA Skylab 3 Mission NASA Skylab 4 Mission NASA Apollo–Soyuz Test Project Mission NASA STS‑1 Columbia Mission NASA STS‑3 Columbia Mission NASA STS‑7 Challenger Mission NASA STS‑8 Challenger Mission NASA STS‑41B Challenger Mission NASA STS‑41G Discovery (1st female EVA) Mission NASA STS‑51L Challenger (accident) Mission NASA STS‑26 Discovery (Return‑to‑Flight) Mission NASA STS‑31 Discovery (Hubble Launch) Mission NASA STS‑49 Endeavour (first capture EVA) Mission NASA STS‑61 Endeavour (Hubble Servicing 1) Mission NASA STS‑73 Columbia (microgravity) Mission NASA STS‑95 Discovery (John Glenn returns) Mission NASA STS‑107 Columbia (accident) Mission NASA STS‑114 Discovery (RTF‑2) Mission NASA STS‑120 Discovery (Node 2) Mission NASA STS‑125 Atlantis (Final Hubble Service) Mission NASA STS‑132 Atlantis Mission NASA STS‑135 Atlantis (Final Shuttle flight) Mission NASA Artemis I (Orion/ SLS‑1) Mission NASA Artemis II (Planned) Mission NASA Artemis III (Planned lunar landing) Mission NASA Mariner 4 Mission NASA Mariner 6 Mission NASA Mariner 7 Mission NASA Mariner 9 Mission NASA Viking 1 Orbiter/Lander Mission NASA Viking 2 Orbiter/Lander Mission NASA Mars Pathfinder & Sojourner Mission NASA Mars Global Surveyor Mission NASA 2001 Mars Odyssey Mission NASA Mars Exploration Rover – Spirit Mission NASA Mars Exploration Rover – Opportunity Mission NASA Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter Mission NASA Phoenix Mars Lander Mission NASA InSight Mars Lander Mission NASA Mars 2020 (Perseverance & Ingenuity) Mission NASA Mars Sample Return – SRL (planned) Mission NASA Pioneer 10 Mission NASA Pioneer 11 Mission NASA Voyager 1 Mission NASA Voyager 2 Mission NASA Galileo Jupiter Orbiter/Probe Mission NASA Cassini–Huygens Mission NASA New Horizons (Pluto & KBO) Mission NASA Juno Mission NASA Europa Clipper (planned) Mission NASA Parker Solar Probe Mission NASA Solar Orbiter (ESA/NASA) Mission NASA Surveyor 1 Mission NASA Lunar Orbiter 1 Mission NASA Lunar Prospector Mission NASA LCROSS Mission NASA LADEE Mission NASA Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Mission NASA CAPSTONE Mission NASA VIPER Rover (planned) Mission NASA NEAR Shoemaker Mission NASA Deep Space 1 Mission NASA Stardust Mission NASA Genesis Mission NASA Deep Impact Mission NASA Dawn (Vesta/Ceres) Mission NASA OSIRIS‑REx Mission NASA Lucy Mission NASA DART Mission NASA Landsat‑1 (ERTS‑1) Mission NASA Landsat‑5 Mission NASA Landsat‑9 Mission NASA Terra Mission NASA Aqua Mission NASA Aura Mission NASA Suomi NPP Mission NASA Sentinel‑6 Michael Freilich Mission NASA ICESat‑2 Mission NASA GRACE‑FO Mission NASA SMAP Mission NASA GPM Core Observatory Mission NASA CALIPSO Mission NASA CloudSat Mission NASA NISAR (NASA‑ISRO) Mission NASA Explorer 1 Mission NASA COBE Mission NASA Compton Gamma Ray Observatory Mission NASA Hubble Space Telescope Mission NASA Chandra X‑ray Observatory Mission NASA Spitzer Space Telescope Mission NASA WISE Mission NASA Kepler Mission NASA TESS Mission NASA Fermi Gamma‑ray Space Telescope Mission NASA NICER Mission NASA IXPE Mission NASA Roman Space Telescope (planned) Mission NASA NuSTAR Mission NASA GALEX Mission NASA Swift Mission NASA SOHO (ESA/NASA) Mission NASA Cluster II (ESA/NASA) Mission NASA TIMED Mission NASA STEREO‑A/B Mission NASA MMS Mission NASA IRIS Mission NASA Solar Dynamics Observatory Mission NASA X‑37B OTV‑1 (USAF/NASA liaison) Mission NASA X‑59 QueSST Mission NASA Mars Helicopter Ingenuity Mission NASA Valkyrie R5 Robot Mission NASA Low‑Boom Flight Demo Mission NASA CRS‑1 Dragon Mission NASA CRS‑1 Cygnus Mission NASA Crew Dragon Demo‑2 Mission NASA Starliner OFT‑2 Mission NASA STS-2 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-4 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-5 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-6 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-41C (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-41D (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-51A (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-61C (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-26 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-27 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-29 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-30 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-32 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-34 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-38 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-45 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-60 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-70 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-71 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-73 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-88 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-92 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-97 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-99 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-100 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-104 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-106 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-110 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-112 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-115 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-116 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-117 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-118 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-120 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-122 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-123 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-126 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA STS-130 (Shuttle flight) Mission NASA Vanguard 1 Mission NASA Transit 1B Mission NASA Echo 1 Mission NASA Telstar 1 Mission NASA Syncom 3 Mission NASA ATS‑6 Mission NASA Skynet Mission NASA Nimbus‑1 Mission NASA Nimbus‑7 Mission NASA ERS-1 Mission NASA SeaSat Mission NASA QuikSCAT Mission NASA Jason‑1 Mission NASA Jason‑3 Mission NASA ICESat Mission NASA Earth Observing‑1 Mission NASA Orbiting Carbon Observatory‑2 Mission NASA CYGNSS Mission NASA PACE Mission NASA TRMM Mission NASA Terrestrial Planet Finder (cxl) Mission NASA Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) Mission NASA Explorer 33 Mission NASA Voyager Interstellar Mission Mission NASA Helios‑A Mission NASA Helios‑B Mission NASA ISEE‑3 (ICE) Mission NASA ACE Mission NASA DSCOVR Mission NASA IBEX Mission NASA Solar Orbiter Heliospheric Imager Mission NASA SAGE‑III ISS Mission NASA SPACE Telescope Imaging Spectrograph Mission NASA ARIEL (ESA/NASA) Mission NASA OSAM‑1 (Restore‑L) Mission NASA Dragonfly (Titan rotorcraft) Mission NASA VERITAS (Venus orbiter) Mission NASA DAVINCI (Venus probe) Mission NASA SPHEREx Mission NASA MAGGIE (Mars Geophysical) Mission NASA CLPS – Peregrine Mission NASA CLPS – VIPER Delivery Mission NASA CAPSTONE Mission NASA Gateway (HALO / PPE) Mission NASA Mars Telecommunication Orbiter (cxl) Mission NASA Mars Polar Lander (MPL) Mission NASA Mars Climate Orbiter Mission NASA Pathfinder Mission Mission NASA SLS Block 1B (Exploration Upper Stage) Mission NASA Orion Crew Module Mission NASA Commercial LEO Destinations – Axiom Station Mission NASA ISS Expedition 1 Mission NASA ISS Expedition 70 Mission NASA CRS‑11 (Dragon) Mission NASA CRS‑21 (Dragon 2) Mission NASA Snoopy CubeSat Mission
Home / UPSC Editorials / Sub-categorization in Scheduled Caste Reservation

Sub-categorization in Scheduled Caste Reservation| UPSC Editorials

Last Updated on Aug 02, 2024
Also Read Sub-categorization in Scheduled Caste Reservation in Hindi
Download As PDF
IMPORTANT LINKS
Why Loksabha Speaker & Deputy Speaker are in News? Why Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 and NEET are in news? Indo-Bangladesh Relations Manipur Conflict National Emergency in India Balancing Religious Traditions and Human Dignity India-West Diplomatic Relations India Needs a National Security Strategy Judicial Oversight in the Prevention of Money Laundering Act India Russia Bilateral Relations Digital Bharat Nidhi (DBN) COP 28 Climate Summit Muslim Women’s Right to Maintenance NITI Aayog’s Sustainable Development Goals Report India Mauritius Relations Supreme Court Ruling on the Citizenship Case Economic Outlook Survey 2023-24 Union Budget 2024-25 Person with Disability

The Supreme Court of India, in a landmark 6:1 verdict delivered on August 1, 2024, has allowed the sub-categorization of Scheduled Castes (SC) within the reservations framework. The judgment by the seven-judge Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud is a clear departure from the apex Court's earlier judgments considering Scheduled Castes as one homogeneous unit. This decision is going to reconsider the judgment of the year 2004 in the case of E.V. Chinnaiah v State of Andhra Pradesh, and it is most likely to affect reservation policies' execution in the whole of India.

Analysis based on 

Editorial Supreme Court allows sub-categorisation in Scheduled Caste reservation: What is the case? published in The Indian Express on August 1st, 2024

Topics for UPSC Prelims

Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, Articles related to equality and non-discrimination (Articles 14-18), Articles related to reservations and affirmative action (Articles 15, 16, 17, 46), Indra Sawhney vs. Union of India (Mandal Commission case), Nagraj vs. Union of India, 9th Schedule (protection of laws under judicial review), Lists of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, Government policies for SC/ST welfare, National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC), National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST).

Topics for UPSC Mains

Reservation Policies in India, creamy layer and its application to OBCs and SC/STs, Affirmative Action and Social Justice, Amendments related to reservations (like the 77th, 81st, 82nd, and 85th Amendments), Social Implications of Reservations

The 2024 Supreme Court Ruling on SC ST Sub-Categorization

The Supreme Court has now allowed subcategorization of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes for extending wider protection to underrepresented groups. The majority judgment authored by Chief Justice Chandrachud, with Justices B.R. Gavai, Vikram Nath, Bela M. Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra, and Satish Chandra Sharma joining him in the opinion, rests on several key arguments:

  • Non-Homogeneity of Scheduled Castes: The Court took cognizance of the fact that Scheduled Castes do not constitute a single, homogeneous group. Both historical and empirical evidence is satisfactory to point out that there are sharp socio-economic differences among these groups.
  • State Empowerment: The Court held that Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution empower states to make special provisions for the advancement of the SCs and STs, including making sub-quotas to address varying levels of social and educational backwardness. This departs from E.V. Chinnaiah, which had held that states cannot tinker with the Presidential list.
  • Need for Effective Representation: The Court pressed on the fact that there has to be effective representation, not only numerical. In other words, if some SC communities are numerically represented, they are still going to be at a disadvantage if they aren't adequately represented at higher positions or at positions of decision-making.
  • Requirement of Empirical Evidence: By this verdict, the states are mandated to provide empirical evidence and a reasonable rationale for any subclassification under the SC list. This is for ensuring that such classification systems have a base of quantifiable data, bringing out the need for wider protections.
  • Creamy Layer Principle: While the majority ruling did not apply, in general, the principle of the 'creamy layer' to SCs, already in force for Other Backward Classes, Justice Gavai favored its induction. This principle provides for an income ceiling for reservation eligibility so that benefits go to the neediest amongst the community.

Read the article on the Women’s Reservation Bill!

UPSC Beginners Program

Get UPSC Beginners Program SuperCoaching @ just

₹50000

Claim for free
Want to know more about this pass ?
Explore SuperCoaching

Issues Before the SC Bench

The Supreme Court bench had to consider whether states have the authority to sub-classify castes within the Scheduled Castes (SC) list to address varying degrees of backwardness. Additionally, it had to examine if the creamy layer principle, which excludes the more affluent members from reservation benefits, should apply to SCs.

Should all Castes in SC List be Treated Similarly?

Article 341(1) of the Constitution empowers the President to notify Scheduled Castes; Article 341(2) lays down that this list cannot be altered except by Parliament. The 2004 E V Chinnaiah judgment had held that SCs must be treated as a homogeneous group with uniform benefits flowing to them. But in the latest judgment, CJI Chandrachud has now discarded this argument by holding that the Presidential list is a legal construct for dispensing benefits and does not reflect any kind of homogeneity in SCs. The myriad socio-economic differences within the SC list are therefore acknowledged.

State Authority in Sub-Classifying the SC List

Articles 15(4) and 16(4) allow states to make special provisions and reservations for inadequately represented SCs. This was limited by the E V Chinnaiah judgement which held that subclassification within the list of SCs cannot be done. The recent judgement has reversed this ruling and has held that states can indeed recognize different degrees of social backwardness among SCs and issue targeted quotas. Justice Gavai argued if there are different starting points amongst SCs, then different opportunities must be provided to achieve true equality.

Criteria for Sub-Classification of SC Groups

The majority judgment lays down that states have to justify sub-classifications based on empirical data and reasonable justification. The representation in public services has to be effective, not merely numerical. So states will now have to successfully establish that the sub-groups from the SC list are more disadvantaged and poorly represented, on the basis of quantifiable data.

Applicability of the Creamy Layer Principle to SCs

Justice Gavai supported the creamy layer principle for SCs, as in the case of OBCs, by introducing an income ceiling so that only the really needy benefit from reservations. Four of the seven judges agreed to the principle and, therefore, may have opened a window of support for it in the future within SC reservations.

Read the article on the Debate on Reservations in the Constituent Assembly!

Implications of the Current Judgment

The Supreme Court judgment has key implications for states attempting to fiddle with their reservation policies to extend their reach to underrepresented SC groups:

  • Wider protection: States can now provide for sub-quotas within the SC reservation quota, allowing sharper affirmative action policies.
  • Judicial scrutiny: All such subclassifications that are brought in by the states will be open to judicial review to ensure these are empirically backed and pass constitutional muster.
  • Policy Reformation: The judgment is predicted to bring a few major state-level policy changes and can afford sufficient scope for socio-economic upliftment, whether or not the purpose of reservation is allowed to remain tailored.

Historical Background

In E.V. Chinnaiah v State of Andhra Pradesh, the Supreme Court ruled that Scheduled Castes must be treated as a homogeneous group, so any subclassification within these communities cannot be permitted for the purposes of reservations. The Court ruled that only the President, under Article 341 of the Constitution, could notify which communities would be eligible for SC reservation benefits, and neither states nor any other authority is permitted to alter the list so notified. Effectively, it was developed that such classifications had been imperatively indispensable to deal with historical oppression uniformly and protect the right to equality.

The problem finds its roots tracing back to the 1975 notification issued by the Punjab government in which it formed sub-categories of its SC reservation policy, essentially for the Balmiki and Mazhabi Sikh communities. This policy had to withstand rigor in courts, going to the extent of being eventually struck down in 2004. Successive attempts by the Punjab government to reintroduce the sub-classification remained unsuccessful in view of judicial hurdles that culminated in the Supreme Court's 2014 decision involving the referral to a larger Bench for a reconsideration of the E.V. Chinnaiah decision.

Read the article on the difference between creamy layer and non creamy layer in OBC!

What is Meant by Creamy Layer?

The "creamy layer" is a term applied to the relatively better-placed people in a backward class who are economically advanced. It was introduced to see that the benefits of reservation policies actually reach the really disadvantaged in a community and do not remain confined only to the relatively privileged sections. This principle sets an income ceiling for the Other Backward Classes above which persons are excluded from the benefits of reservation.

Chronology of Events

Year

Event

1975

Punjab government issued a notification to create sub-categories within its SC reservation policy.

1979

The central government established the Mandal Commission to identify the socially or educationally backward. It used social, economic, and educational indicators but was primarily focused on OBCs.

1980

Mandal Commission report recommended providing 27% reservation to OBCs in jobs.

1990

V.P. Singh Government declared 27% reservation in government jobs for OBCs.

1991

Narasimha Rao Government introduced changes to give preference to poorer sections among the OBCs.

1992

Indra Sawhney Judgment – The Supreme Court upheld the government's move of providing 27% reservation for OBCs and stated that advanced sections, or the creamy layer, must be excluded from the list of beneficiaries. However, it held that the concept of the creamy layer does not apply to SCs and STs.

2004

E.V. Chinnaiah v State of Andhra Pradesh – The Supreme Court held that SCs are to be treated as a homogeneous group and sub-classification within the SC list is prohibited.

2006

Nagaraj vs Union of India – The Supreme Court held that reservations in promotion for SC/STs were valid, but the exclusion based on the "creamy layer" principle as it applied to OBCs was not extendable to SC/STs. Thoughtful classification was recommended to identify those who are truly needy.

2014

The Supreme Court referred Chinnaiah's ruling for reconsideration by a larger bench.

2024

SC ruled that states can sub-classify SCs to address varying degrees of backwardness, with some indication of support for applying the creamy layer principle to SCs and STs.

Read the article on Social Classification in Medieval India!

Past Arguments in Support of Application of Creamy Layer to SC/ST

Advocates argue that applying the creamy layer principle ensures that reservation benefits reach the most disadvantaged within SC/ST communities, promoting social equity. They contend that it prevents affluent members from monopolizing resources meant for those in greater need.

  • Efficiency and Fairness: Preventing benefits from being monopolized by the relatively affluent can help increase the effectiveness and fairness of reservations and perhaps gain broader societal acceptance.
  • Nagraj vs. Union of India case: In the Nagraj vs. Union of India case, the Supreme Court of India ruled that Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) should be categorized into sub-groups, with the more advanced individuals, termed as the "creamy layer," being excluded from the benefits of affirmative action. This measure is intended to ensure that the advantages provided by the State reach the most disadvantaged and oppressed sections of these communities.
  • Targeted Welfare: Government efforts can more effectively uplift the economically weaker sections within SC/STs to give strength to the argument of targeted welfare.
  • Preventing Perpetuation of Inequality: Avoiding benefits to the affluent sections within SC/STs prevents the further entrenchment of inequalities within these communities.

Read the article on the India inequality report 2022!

Past Arguments Against Application of Creamy Layer to SC/ST

Opponents argue that the historical and social discrimination faced by SC/ST communities justifies blanket reservation policies. They believe that introducing the creamy layer concept undermines the intended corrective measures of these reservations.

  • Constitutional Provisions: Article 335 provides that the claims of SCs and STs must be considered in services while maintaining efficiency. The provision is about social representation due to historical discrimination, not economic criteria.
  • Indra Sawhney Judgment (1992): Explicitly expressed words about not applying the creamy layer principle to SC/STs, asserting that exclusion on their part does not rest solely on an economic criterion but includes historical and social discrimination.
  • Protection from Exclusion: Reservations to the SC/STs are provided so as to protect them from the blow of systemic caste oppression and for meaningful representation. Economic criteria do not address the social disabilities they face.
  • Complexity in Implementation: If a creamy layer has to be identified among the SC/ST, there can be administrative hassles and scope for disputes that will complicate the whole reservation process.

Read the article on the Socio Economic Caste Census!

Conclusion

Landmark order of the SC on sub-categorization of Scheduled Castes changes the reservation policy landscape of India. By acknowledging the heterogeneity within SC communities and making states capable of targeting backwardness, the Court has given room for more inclusive and more effective affirmative action. In doing this, the judgment has described what reservation policy should encompass while also underlining that, in view of the challenges thrown at social justice in India, there is a need for continuous empirical assessment and adaptive governance.

Testbook provides a set of comprehensive notes for different competitive exams. Testbook is always on the top of the list because of its best quality assured products like live tests, mocks, Content pages, GK and current affairs videos, and much more. You can check out our UPSC Online Coaching, and download the Testbook App now to check out various other topics relevant to the UPSC IAS Exam.

UPSC Previous Year Questions

Year

Question

2023

Development and welfare schemes for the vulnerable, by their nature, are discriminatory in approach. Do you agree? Give reasons for your answer.

2017

What are the two major legal initiatives by the State since Independence addressing discrimination against Scheduled Tribes (STs).

UPSC Practice Questions

Q1. Discuss the arguments for and against the application of the "creamy layer" concept to Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST). How can the state ensure that affirmative action policies effectively reach the most disadvantaged sections of these communities?

Q2. The implementation of the "creamy layer" concept in the context of SC/ST reservations has been a contentious issue in India. Examine the constitutional provisions and judicial interpretations that have shaped this debate, and suggest potential pathways to balance equity and inclusivity in reservation policies.

Report An Error
Exams Tests Super Practice