Introduction

In a landmark ruling on August 1, 2024, the Supreme Court of India, in a 6:1 decision, permitted states to create sub-classifications within Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs). This decision, delivered by a seven-judge bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, aims to better target support for the most disadvantaged groups within these communities. The ruling overturns the 2004 verdict in the E.V. Chinnaiah vs. State of Andhra Pradesh case, which had prohibited such sub-classifications.

Key Aspects of the Verdict

1. Permission for Sub-Classification

• The Supreme Court has ruled that states can create sub-classifications within SCs and STs to provide more targeted support. This allows for separate quotas within the existing 15% reservation for SCs, addressing varying levels of backwardness among these communities.

2. Sub-Classification on an Empirical Basis

• The Court emphasized that any sub-classification must be based on empirical data and historical evidence of systemic discrimination, rather than arbitrary or politically motivated reasons.
• States must substantiate their classifications with quantifiable data.

3. Extension of Creamy Layer Principle

• Extending the ‘creamy layer’ principle, previously applied to Other Backward Classes (OBCs), the Court ruled that more affluent individuals within SCs and STs must be excluded from reservation benefits. This ensures that assistance reaches those who are truly disadvantaged.

4. Judicial Review of Sub-Classification Decisions

• The Supreme Court highlighted that decisions made by states regarding sub-classification are subject to judicial review to prevent potential misuse for political gain.

5. Generational Limit to Availing Reservation

• The Court noted that reservation benefits should be limited to the first generation of beneficiaries.
• If a family member has already availed these benefits and achieved a higher social status, subsequent generations may not qualify for reservation.

Roots of the Case for Sub-Classification

• Efforts for sub-classification of SCs and STs have a long history.
• In 1975, the Punjab Government issued a notification dividing the 25% SC reservation into categories, reserving a portion for the Balmiki and Mazhabi Sikh communities.
• In 2000, the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes (Rationalisation of Reservations) Act provided an expansive list of SC communities and their respective quotas. However, the Supreme Court struck down these efforts in the E.V. Chinnaiah case (2004), declaring that SCs constitute a homogenous group, and sub-classification within this group was unconstitutional. This decision was based on the interpretation of Article 341 of the Constitution, which empowers the President to notify SCs.
• The Court suggested that any sub-classification would violate the right to equality under Article 14.
• Despite this, various states argued that certain groups within the SC category were underrepresented and required additional support. This led to calls for the Supreme Court to reassess the E.V. Chinnaiah ruling, resulting in the recent landmark verdict.

Significance of the Verdict

1. Enhanced Social Justice by Targeted Reservations

• The Court aims to ensure that the most marginalized groups within SCs and STs receive appropriate support by allowing sub-classification. This can lead to more effective reservation policies, promoting greater social equity.

2. Constitutional Validation

• The verdict asserts that sub-classification does not violate Articles 14 (right to equality) or 341 (definition of SCs) of the Constitution.

• States have the constitutional authority to identify different degrees of social backwardness and provide targeted reservations accordingly.

3. Acknowledgement of Social Reality

• The Court recognized that SCs and STs contain social groups of different statuses, based on various traditional occupations. By acknowledging these internal differences, the verdict enables states to implement measures addressing the unique challenges faced by different sub-groups.

4. Need for Data-Driven Policies

• The Court emphasized that any sub-classification must be backed by quantifiable and demonstrable data. This ensures that classifications for affirmative actions are empirically determined and demonstrated.

5. Precedent for Future Cases

• The verdict sets a new legal precedent for administering reservations in India, potentially leading to more effective and equitable reservation strategies in the future.

Challenges in Ensuring Sub-Classification

1. Empirical Data Collection : Gathering reliable data on the socio-economic conditions of different sub-castes is a resource-intensive and time-consuming process.
2. Criteria for Sub-Classification: Determining the specific parameters to measure backwardness, such as educational attainment, income levels, and representation in government jobs, is a complex task.
3. Influence of Political Considerations: There are concerns that sub-classification criteria can be misused for electoral gains.
4. Social Tensions: Sub-classification might exacerbate existing social tensions within SC/ST communities, leading to intra-community conflicts and divisions.
5. Administrative Burden: Creating, managing, and updating sub-categories would add a significant administrative burden on government agencies.

Way Forward

1. Consensus Building: Building consensus among various stakeholders, including political parties, community leaders, and civil society organizations, is essential for successful implementation.
2. Effective Monitoring and Grievance Redressal: States must put in place effective monitoring mechanisms and grievance redressal systems to prevent leakage and ensure support reaches the most disadvantaged sub-groups.
3. Maintaining Social Harmony: Addressing the concerns of other marginalized communities who may feel left out or threatened by sub-classification is crucial to maintain social harmony and prevent conflicts.
4. Strengthening Administrative Capacity: Strengthening the administrative and institutional capacity of states to implement sub-classification policies effectively is essential.
5. Adequate Financial Resources: Providing adequate financial resources to states for conducting surveys, implementing sub-classification policies, and monitoring their impact is crucial for the success of this initiative.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s recent ruling marks a significant step towards targeted social justice. By allowing sub-classification within SCs and STs, the Court has paved the way for more nuanced and effective reservation policies, ensuring that the most marginalized groups receive the support they nee