Supreme Court of India Allows Sub-Classification of Reserved Categories

Context:

The Supreme Court of India, in a review judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, has delivered a landmark verdict allowing states the authority to sub-classify reserved category groups, such as Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs), for reservation purposes. This 6-1 majority decision overturns the 2004 ruling in E.V. Chinnaiah vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, fundamentally changing the landscape of reservation policies in India.

Relevance:

GS II: Polity and Governance

Dimensions of the Article:

1. SC’s Verdict on Sub-Classifications of SCs and STs
2. Arguments For Sub-Classification:
3. Arguments Against Sub-Classification:
4. Significance of the Supreme Court Verdict
5. Challenges for Sub-Classification

SC’s Verdict on Sub-Classifications of SCs and STs

• Constitutional Allowance: The Court ruled that states can constitutionally sub-classify SCs and STs based on varying levels of backwardness.
• Support for Disadvantaged Groups: States can now sub-classify SCs within the 15% reservation quota to better support the most disadvantaged groups.
• Sub-Classification vs. Sub-Categorisation: The Chief Justice of India emphasized the difference between “sub-classification” and “sub-categorisation,” warning against using these classifications for political gains rather than genuine upliftment.
• Empirical Basis Required: Sub-classification should be based on empirical data and historical evidence of systemic discrimination, not on arbitrary or political reasons.
• Fairness and Effectiveness: States must base their sub-classification on empirical evidence to ensure fairness and effectiveness.
• 100% Reservation Not Permissible: The Court clarified that 100% reservation for any sub-class is not allowed, and state decisions on sub-classification are subject to judicial review to prevent political misuse.
• Creamy Layer Principle: The ‘creamy layer’ principle, previously applied to OBCs (as highlighted in the Indra Sawhney Case), should now also be applied to SCs and STs. States must identify and exclude the creamy layer within SCs and STs from reservation benefits.
• First Generation Only: Reservations should be limited to the first generation. If any generation in the family has benefited from the reservation and achieved a higher status, the benefit would not be available to the second generation.
• Rationale: The Court acknowledged that systemic discrimination prevents some SC and ST members from advancing. Sub-classification under Article 14 of the Constitution can help address these disparities, allowing states to tailor reservation policies more effectively to support the most disadvantaged.

Arguments For Sub-Classification:

• Policy Design: Allows both central and state governments to design policies that better address the needs of the most disadvantaged within SC/ST communities.
• Social Justice: Helps achieve the constitutional goal of social justice by providing targeted benefits to those who need them the most.
• Article 16(4): Permits reservations for backward classes who are inadequately represented in state services.
• Article 15(4): Empowers the state to create special arrangements for promoting the interests and welfare of socially and educationally backward classes such as SCs and STs.
• Article 342A: Supports the flexibility of states in maintaining their lists of socially and economically backward classes.

Arguments Against Sub-Classification:

• Undermines Uniform Status: Critics argue that sub-classification could undermine the uniform status of SCs and STs as recognized in the Presidential list.
• Further Division and Inequality: Concerns that sub-classification could lead to further division and potentially exacerbate inequalities within the SC community.

Significance of the Supreme Court Verdict

• Reversal of E.V. Chinnaiah Ruling: The Supreme Court’s decision overturns the previous E.V. Chinnaiah judgment, which had maintained that SCs and STs were homogeneous and could not be subdivided for reservation purposes under Article 341 of the Indian Constitution.
• Constitutional Compliance: The Chief Justice of India clarified that sub-classifying Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes does not violate Articles 14 or 341 of the Constitution.
• Validation of State Laws: The ruling supports various state laws that had been invalidated, such as those in Punjab and Tamil Nadu, thus allowing states to create sub-categories within SC and ST groups.
• Case of Punjab: The 1975 notification by the Punjab government, which divided SC reservations into categories for Valmikis and Mazhabi Sikhs, was initially upheld but later challenged following the E.V. Chinnaiah judgment. This new ruling reinstates such state-specific sub-classifications.
• Authority for States: States now have the power to implement sub-classification policies, leading to potentially more effective and nuanced reservation strategies.
• New Precedent: This decision establishes a new precedent for the administration of reservations, likely influencing similar cases and policies across India.

Challenges for Sub-Classification

• Accurate Data Collection: Obtaining precise and comprehensive data on the socio-economic conditions of various sub-groups within SCs and STs is crucial.
• Empirical Justification: States must rely on empirical evidence to justify sub-classification decisions, which requires accuracy and impartiality in data collection.
• Uniformity vs. Local Needs: Tailoring policies to local needs may lead to variations across states. Striking a balance between uniformity and addressing specific local requirements is challenging.
• Political Opposition: Sub-classification policies may face resistance from political groups that either support or oppose changes to the reservation system, leading to potential conflicts and delays.
• Intra-Community Tensions: Sub-classification might increase social tensions within SC/ST communities, leading to potential intra-community conflicts and divisions.
• Administrative Burden: Creating, managing, and updating sub-categories adds a significant administrative burden on government agencies, requiring additional resources and manpower.

-Source: Indian Express