In a landmark ruling on Thursday, the Supreme Court directed that the ‘creamy layer’ within the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) be identified and excluded from quota benefits. The decision, led by Chief Justice Chandrachud and a bench comprising Justices BR Gavai, Vikram Nath, Bela M Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra, and Satish Chandra Sharma, marks a significant shift in reservation policies, aiming to ensure that affirmative action reaches the most deserving.
The ‘creamy layer’ refers to those members within the SCs and STs who are economically and socially better off compared to others in these groups. This concept was previously applied to the Other Backward Classes (OBCs), and with this ruling, it extends to all reserved categories.
The court’s decision overrules its previous stance in the EV Chinnaiah case, which held that sub-classifications within the SCs and STs were impermissible, viewing these groups as homogeneous. The current ruling supports the idea that even within these groups, there are disparities that need addressing.
Justice BR Gavai highlighted the necessity of this policy change, noting that without such measures, true equality remains elusive. He emphasized the importance of state governments developing criteria specific to SCs and STs to effectively identify the creamy layer. According to Gavai, “State must evolve a policy to identify creamy layer among the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes category and exclude them from the fold of affirmative action. That is the only way to achieve equality.”
Furthermore, Justice Pankaj Mithal added a generational perspective to the reservation policy. He argued that benefits should not extend to the second generation of families where the first has already overcome social and economic hurdles through reservation. Mithal’s remarks point to the need for a dynamic and responsive reservation system that adapts to changing socio-economic landscapes, particularly highlighting the differences between rural and urban disparities.
Also Read
The ruling has sparked a range of responses, reflecting the complex socio-political landscape of India’s reservation system. While some applaud the decision as a step towards meritocracy and fairness, others express concern about its implications on the socio-economically backward members of the SCs and STs who might still need support.
