The Supreme Court ruled that states must identify the 'creamy layer' within the SCs and STs and exclude them from quota benefits.
Livemint
Updated1 Aug 2024, 03:19 PM IST
The Supreme Court has asked the states to identify the ’creamy later’ within caste system and exclude them from reservations(HT_PRINT)
The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday, August 1, that states must identify ‘creamy layer’ in the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) and exclude them from quota benefits. The Supreme Court also ruled by a majority judgment that sub-classification within the SC and STs reservation is permissible, overruling the earlier order in the EV Chinnaiah matter that sub-classification was not permissible as SC/STs form “homogenous classes”.
Besides Chief Justice Chandrachud, other judges on the bench were Justices BR Gavai, Vikram Nath, Bela M Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra, and Satish Chandra Sharma.
What is a ‘creamy layer’ within castes and tribes? ‘Creamy layer’ are a category of persons within reserved categories – scheduled castes and scheduled tribes in this case – that are economically and socially advanced.
Play
Unmute
Loaded: 4.84%
Fullscreen
Speaking on the ‘creamy layer' within the SCs and STs, Justice BR Gavai said there are categories within the scheduled castes and tribes that have been oppressed for centuries, holding that the state governments must identify them.
“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," Justice Gavai was quoted as saying by Live Law. That, he said, was the only way to achieve equality.
Justice Gavai also held that the criteria for identifying the creamy layer among SCs/STs should differ from those used for the Other Backward Castes (OBCs).
Agreeing with Justice Gavai's observations, Justice Pankaj Mithal stated that reservation among SCs and STs has to be limited to the first generation. He said it should not be extended to the second generation if any member of the first generation has reached higher status through reservation.
“It is also commonly known that disparities and social discrimination, which is highly prevalent in the rural areas, start diminishing when one travels to the urban and metropolitan areas. I have no hesitation to hold that putting a child studying in St. Paul's High School and St. Stephen's College and a child studying in a small village in the backward and remote area of the country in the same bracket would obliviate the equality principle enshrined in the Constitution,” Justice Gavai stated.
He held, “Putting the children of the parents from the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes who on account of benefit of reservation have reached a high position and ceased to be socially, economically and educationally backward and the children of parents doing manual work in the villages in the same category would defeat the constitutional mandate.”
Related Stories