The judgement, on the idea of sub-categorisation for quota, by the Constitutional Bench has political implications.
Published Feb 07, 2024 | 5:03 PM ⚊ Updated Feb 07, 2024 | 5:03 PM
The Supreme Court of India. (iStock)
A seven-judge Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court is currently hearing the matter of whether sub-classification of Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) is permissible to ensure that the most backward among these sections benefit from a separate quota within the reservation quota for the category.
The idea is to see if, within the reservation quota for SCs and STs, a sub-quota can be created to benefit the most backward among them.
The contention in the case relates to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the EV Chinnaiah v State of Andhra Pradesh, 2004.
The Chinnaiah verdict held that sub-classification within the SCs cannot be done under the list created by the President as Scheduled Castes under Article 341 form one class of homogenous group.
As they are one complete class under the schedule, any further division of the said class would amount to tinkering with the Presidential List, it said.
The ruling also observed that the Indra Sawhney case of 1992 had permitted sub-classification but only to the extent of Other Backward Classes and not for SCs/STs.
The seven-judge has been requested to revisit this judgment in light of a more recent case in Punjab where the Punjab Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes (Reservation in Services) Act, 2006, which provided 50 per cent quota and first preference to Valmikis and Mazhabi Sikhs in public jobs within the quota meant for the Scheduled Castes.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court quoted the Chinnaiah case, among other grounds, to state the sub-categorisation was unconstitutional. A couple of other states have also toyed with this idea.
The case has now been referred to the Constitutional bench, which began hearing on Tuesday, 6 February.
Presided by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, it comprises Justices BR Gavai, Vikram Nath, Bela M Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra, and Satish Chandra Sharma.
Opening the arguments, the Advocate General of Punjab, Gurminder Singh, defended the sub-categorisation order, saying it was “not an act of exclusion, this was an act of inclusion of those who were the most backward of the backward to bring them up from where they stood”.
Summarising Singh’s arguments, Justice Vikram Nath wondered why there couldn’t be exclusion then. His train of thought was: If, according to Singh, some sub-castes in the SC category have done well, shouldn’t they come out of reservations and compete in the general category? And let the most backward sub-castes continue to get reservations.
The Justice observed, “Once you achieve the concept of reservation, you should pull out of that reservation.”
Chief Justice Chandrachud’s observations were along the same lines. He said sub-classification seeks to make an exclusion within the socially excluded. That amounts to saying backwardness is relative to the deprived sections.
In summary, he said, “When courses are reserved for backward communities, the forward communities face exclusion. Yet, the Constitutional jurisprudence is okay with it. By the same logic, in Punjab, the better off among SCs sought to be excluded through a sub-quota for the most backward SCs.”
Chief Justice Chandrachud asked, “Can that exclusion not be justified on the same yardstick which we have applied in the exclusion of the backward v. forward context?”
The hearing continues daily.
The Chinnaiah verdict raises some issues that will come up for discussion. The prominent of them are:
The judgment on this matter by the Constitutional Bench has a political implication. The Centre has been toying with the idea of sub-categorisation.
Implementing sub-categorisation among the backward classes will depend on the recommendations of the Rohini Commission that studied the matter. In any case, the Indira Sawhney verdict did not object to sub-categorisation in reservation for the backward classes.
Regarding sub-classification for SCs and STs, the Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, has already pitched it. At an election rally in Telangana before the assembly elections, the prime minister promised to look into the sub-categorisation of SCs to identify the most backward groups among them.
At that time, Modi’s statement was interpreted as an attempt by the BJP to woo the Madiga community, whose leaders claim their share of the reservation benefits are being usurped by the Malas, another SC community.
