Published Jul 08, 2026 | 5:22 PM ⚊ Updated Jul 08, 2026 | 5:23 PM
The High Court had quashed a GO that allowed BC certificates to certain sections of Islam converts.
Synopsis: The high court quashed a government order that allowed eligible Backward Class and Scheduled Caste Hindus, who had converted to Islam, to obtain Backward Class Muslim community certificates. The state government has now approached the Supreme Court against the high court order that held the government order was unconstitutional and could not override settled judicial precedents.
The Tamil Nadu government has approached the Supreme Court, challenging a Madras High Court order quashing a government order that allowed eligible Backward Class (BC) and Scheduled Caste (SC) Hindus, who had converted to Islam, to obtain Backward Class Muslim community certificates.
The appeal challenged the High Court’s 25 June verdict, which held that the government order was unconstitutional and could not override settled judicial precedents.
The case originated from a petition filed by Sameer Ahmed of Thoothukudi, who had converted to Islam, and sought a community certificate under the ‘Muslim Labbai’ category. After revenue authorities rejected his application, he approached the Madras High Court.
During the pendency of the case, the then DMK government issued GO Ms No 31 on 9 March 2024, permitting eligible Hindu converts to Islam to be classified under one of the seven recognised Backward Class Muslim communities to protect their reservation benefits.
However, a Division Bench of the Madras High Court struck down the government order, observing that communities such as Labbai, Rowther and Marakkayar are birth-based communities and cannot be claimed solely through religious conversion. The court also held that an executive order cannot nullify binding judicial precedents.
With the latest appeal, the C Joseph Vijay-led government has sought the Supreme Court’s intervention to set aside the High Court’s verdict. This is the third major appeal filed by the government in recent weeks on religion-related issues, after challenging the High Court’s orders in the Thiruparankundram temple lamp-lighting case and the ban on animal slaughter outside designated slaughterhouses.
Also Read: TN moves Supreme Court against Madras HC’s Bakrid slaughter restrictions
A division bench of the Madras High Court, comprising Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice PB Balaji, struck down the Tamil Nadu government’s 2024 order that allowed individuals belonging to BC, MBC, DNC and Scheduled Caste communities who convert to Islam to retain reservation benefits under the BC-Muslim category.
The case had been filed in 2022 by Sameer, born as Paramasivam in a Hindu family, but converted to Islam in 2015. He had approached the court after his application for a BC-Muslim (Muslim Lebbai) community certificate was rejected by the Tahsildar. The legal dispute should have taken a major turn after the Tamil Nadu government issued GO No 31, which strengthened his claim.
During hearings, the bench noted that the petitioner’s claim rested entirely on the validity of this government order and therefore examined whether the order itself was constitutionally valid.
The judges referred to earlier precedents, including the landmark G Michael (1952) ruling, which held that once a person converts to Islam, caste identity ceases and the individual becomes “just a Muslim.” The court held that the state government could not override settled judicial precedent through an executive order.
The bench further ruled that membership in Tamil Nadu’s recognised backward Muslim communities such as Labbai, Rowther, Marakkayar, Syed and Sheikh is determined by birth and not by religious conversion. In effect, a person can convert to Islam, but cannot convert into a birth-based backward Muslim community.
The judges also criticised the government for clubbing together BC, MBC, DNC (De-Notified Communities) and Scheduled Caste converts under a single reservation category, observing that Scheduled Castes and OBC communities are constitutionally distinct categories and cannot simply be merged to preserve reservation benefits after conversion.
In one of its strongest observations, the bench said Islam historically preaches equality and does not recognise caste hierarchy, making it contradictory for Muslims to subsequently claim caste-based backwardness within Islam for reservation purposes.
The court ultimately declared GO No. 31 unconstitutional, rejected the petitioner’s application and ruled that a convert to Islam cannot automatically claim BC-Muslim reservation status.
