The Supreme Court on Thursday pronounced a landmark judgment allowing states to grant separate quotas to sub-classifications of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes in a push for greater social equality within the Indian society.
A seven-judge bench – CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices BR Gavai, Vikram Nath, Bela M Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra and Satish Chandra Mishra – in a 6-1 ruling okayed the sub-classification within the SC/ST community, saying, “The members of SC/ST categories are not often unable to climb up the ladder due to the systemic discrimination they face. Article 14 permits sub-classification of caste.”
The order is expected to further broaden job and employment opportunities for marginalised people in society.
While the judgment is likely to be beneficial for the SC/ST group, there are some conditions that one of the six judges has said should be applied to avail the benefits of the reservation.
‘Quota for only first gen’
Justice Pankaj Mithal, one of the six judges who said yes to the quota within quota ruling, believes that the reservation should be limited to only one generation.
“If the 1st generation reached a higher status through the reservation, the 2nd generation should not be entitled to it,” he said.
His remarks were concurred by two other judges, including Justice BR Gavai who added that the State must identify SC/STs who are in the creamy layer and “take them out of the fold of affirmative action.” He said that this is the only way through which “true equality” can be gained.
Has the question of 1st gen quota been raised before?
This is not the first time that the apex court has opined on which generation of backward classes should avail the benefits of reservation.
In February 2024, the court, during the hearing of the same case, said that it was time to review the quota policy and exclude those who have already benefitted from reservation among the backward classes.
“Why should not be there an exclusion? According to you, amongst a particular category, some of the sub-castes have done better. They are the forward in that category. They should come out of that and compete with the general. Why stay there?” Justice Vikram Nath noted at the time.
With inputs from LiveLaw
Link to article –
