Indian jurisprudence on reservations has historically taken a slender view, usually framing particular provisions as exceptions to the equality code (Articles 14, 15(1), and 16(1)) or merely enabling provisions and never as its integral ingredient. This method has led to reservations being seen as a trade-off with effectivity or a poverty alleviation measure slightly than as a way of making certain effectivity via variety.
The Supreme Courtroom’s ruling on Aug 1 within the State of Punjab vs. Davinder Singh case, which addressed subclassification inside the SC/ST class, displays this restricted understanding of social justice. Whereas the ruling accurately acknowledges the heterogeneity inside SC/ST teams and upholds the validity of subclassification, it additionally introduces the thought of making use of the creamy layer precept to SC/ST reservations — an idea beforehand restricted to OBC reservations. This ruling has obtained combined responses from the SC/ST neighborhood, with robust opposition to introducing the creamy layer precept. Concerning subclassification, the ruling isn’t binding on states however serves as an enabling provision, permitting states to subclassify based mostly on sound knowledge, topic to judicial assessment.
Comparatively much less deprived and vanguard SC/ST castes — like Mahars, Chamars, Jatavs, Dusadh, and so forth.—have predictably opposed subclassification, citing issues like social unity, benefit, lack of information, upskilling and financial packages as a substitute of sub-quota, correct implementation of quotas first, reservation within the personal sector, political energy because the precedence. Additionally they see it as a RSS-BJP ploy to divide SC/STs. A few of these arguments echo these historically made by ahead castes in opposition to reservations. The Aug 21 Bharat Bandh in opposition to the ruling was primarily supported by intellectuals, events and associations from UP, Bihar, Maharashtra, and Rajasthan, dominated by the vanguard SC/ST castes. Leaders like Mayawati, Chandrashekhar Azad, Chirag Paswan, Prakash Ambedkar, Ramdas Athavale strongly backed the bandh.
In distinction, essentially the most deprived SC castes—such because the Valmikis, Madigas, Arunthatiyars, Man, Musahar, Hela, Bansphor, Dhanuk, Dom, and so forth. — largely stayed away from the bandh, significantly in South India (TN, Andhra, Karnataka, Telangana), the place the controversy on sub-categorization is extra superior. These teams have challenged the thought of a unified SC/ST class with out inside justice as a sham, viewing calls for for a caste census and different arguments as preconditions as ways to keep up the established order. They argue that knowledge on illustration in public employment and training already exists, at the very least in uncooked type, as SC/ST quota beneficiaries should present caste certificates mentioning their jati. A number of commissions have studied and endorsed the subclassification demand. The natural demand for it may be traced again to Punjab within the Seventies, gaining momentum via organisations just like the Madiga Reservation Porata Samithi from the Nineties onwards, indicating that this can’t be dismissed as political manipulation alone.
Probably the most contentious side of the ruling is the extension of the creamy layer precept. Curiously, the creamy layer was not among the many points within the Davinder Singh case or the Indra Sawhney vs. Union of India case (1992), the place the nine-member bench had dominated that the creamy layer precept would solely apply to OBCs, not SCs/STs. Regardless of this, a seven-judge bench has advocated for making use of the creamy layer precept to SC/ST reservations, elevating issues amongst those that see it as undermining the aim of reservations. Legislation minister Arjun Meghwal has clarified that the creamy layer doesn’t apply to the SC/ST quota. Nonetheless, the latest judgment has introduced the applicability of this precept to the SC/ST class inside the horizon of risk.
Irony: Arguments of vanguard SC/ST castes echo these historically made by ahead castes in opposition to quotas
Reservations are supposed to guarantee illustration and voice for marginalised teams in decision-making areas, not merely as a device for poverty alleviation or employment technology. Making use of the creamy layer precept, significantly to Class A jobs — the important decision-making sector — may defeat the aim of reservations. It pits high-caste officers with generational privileges and cultural capital in opposition to first-generation OBC officers, usually edging out the latter from influential positions. This diminishes their ‘voice’ in coverage making. Ambedkar had stated, “Training is the milk of the tigress. After getting drunk it, you can not however roar.” Excluding essentially the most educated OBCs from reservations reduces their stake within the OBC class, weakening their mobilisation in comparison with SC/ST teams. This exclusion turns the OBC class right into a ‘headless tigress’, explaining why OBC articulations and mobilisations are weaker than SC/STs.
The vanguard castes ought to be reflexive and settle for evidence-based subclassification whereas in search of broader Bahujan solidarities on different points like caste census, eradicating 50% cap on quotas, creamy layer provision, rising variety within the personal sector, and so forth. Nonetheless, in the event that they persist in resisting it, it may erode their legitimacy with out altering the SC’s resolution, as coalition companions like JDU and TDP assist sub-categorisation, making any constitutional modification unlikely. However parochial caste pursuits can blind.
Ansari is an affiliate professor of sociology at Azim Premji College, Bengaluru. Views are private
Disclaimer
Views expressed above are the creator’s personal.
END OF ARTICLE
