Verdict allowing Sub-Quotas for reservation has potential political twist
By Dr Gyan Pathak
The verdict of the 7-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court of India allowing sub-quotas within the overall quota for Scheduled Castes (SCs) has a potential to twist Indian politics in a new direction, since it paves the way for a new structured reservation policy for the country, not only for the SCs, but also for Scheduled Tribes (STs), Other Backward Castes (OBCs), and Economically Weaker Sections (EWS).
The Bench, comprising Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud and Justices BR Gavai, Vikram Nath, Bela Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra and Satish Chandra Sharma, by a 6:1 majority held that ‘inadequate representation’ of certain SCs across appointments in state services was a key indicator of proving ‘backwardness’ within the Schedule Caste. The States are required to prove an ‘inter se’ backwardness within the SCs in order to make reservations for a specific sub-classified group within the SCs.
Six judges upheld sub-classification, with Justice Trivedi dissenting, which is indicative of the complexity of the issue that may bring several known and unknown factors in the way while implementing the verdict. The verdict has come after the court examined two key issues – 1. Should the state prove ‘inter se backwardness’ as opposed to the decision in Indra Sawhney vs Union of India which held that such backwardness is not required to be proven for SC/STs; and 2. Whether it is necessary to prove the ‘inadequacy of representation of the more backward within the Scheduled Castes?
The verdict has been generally welcomed since it is a well-known fact that there exist certain castes within a larger group of STs, SCs or OBCs which are more backward than the others. We already know the ‘creamy layer’ issue, a term that refers to the relatively affluent and better-educated members among the groups enjoying reservations.
The concept of creamy layer, however, is currently applicable for OBCs who are excluded from reservation benefits in government jobs and educational institutions to ensure that benefits of reservation go to the genuinely underprivileged sections of the OBCs. Families with an annual income above Rs 8 lakh are considered part of creamy layer. This income threshold is revised periodically. Children of high-ranking officers in Group A and Group B services are also considered ‘creamy layer’ candidates and hence excluded from reservation. Additionally, children of professionals such as doctors, engineers, and lawyers with significant income and status, and of families owning large tracts of agricultural land beyond certain specified limits are also included in the creamy layer and excluded.
Though the concept of creamy layer introduced following a Supreme Court judgement in the Indra Sawhney case in 1992, does not apply to SCs and STs. However, 4 out of 7 judges in the Bench advocated for exclusion of the ‘creamy layer’ among SCs and STs, in the current Supreme Court verdict. It means, the impact of the judgement would be felt by all groups presently enjoying reservation.
The verdict has opened the door for sub-classification within the classified SCs, STs, and OBCs on the basis of ‘more backwardness’ relative to other castes in the group. Government will need to prove it only on the basis of ‘inadequate representation’ to be sub-classified. It was made clear that while the state doesn’t need data to prove the entire class is backward, it must collect data to show differences in backwardness within the class if it wants to sub-classify. There is an additional clarification that cadre can’t be used as a unit to assess representation, since it may not display the ground realities. Hence adequate representation has to be based on effective or qualitative data as against quantitative data to ensure the quality representation of backward classes.
It is therefore clear that the sub-classification for providing sub-quota under the main-quota for SCs, STs, and OBCs is going to be a ticklish issue that will generate high social and political heat in the country, since the castes presently enjoying the benefits of reservation would not be easily ready to quit them in favour of other more backward castes among them.
More backward castes have already been demanding that they must be given reservation on the basis of their backwardness, since certain communities have already extracted all the benefits of reservations. Children from relatively well-off castes among STs, SCs, and OBCs bag all the reserved seats while children from less backward castes lag behind because they don’t get educational and other economic opportunities to develop the required talent to compete with them. The Supreme Court verdict has given a new hope for the most unprivileged castes, who would stake their claim, socially, legally, and politically.
The verdict, therefore, gives rise to a different kind of politics of social justice in the country which will affect the political parties that have been batting for social justice since late 1980s. Such political parties would need recalibrations of their stance in respect of their support base among certain castes, since they have been accused of neglecting other less backward castes.
The demand for Caste Census will further gain strength in this backdrop, and the direction of the political twist will depend on how the INDIA bloc parties respond to this issue. As for the BJP, it would like to derive benefit from the possible rifts between the marginalised castes and the dominant castes among the SCs, STs, and OBCs. The RSS-BJP clan would try to gain ground among the new aspirant castes for sub-quotas by telling them how they have been cheated by their ‘social justice’ leaders and parties.
NDA allies on the other hand, such as JD(U) and TDP will play their social justice card comparatively better than the BJP. JD(U) leader Nitish Kumar had already got caste census conducted and got a legislation passed for 65 per cent reservation that has recently been struck down by the Patna High Court which was upheld by the Supreme Court of India. The latest verdict would pave the way for structured reservation in Bihar before the elections due next year.
TDP leader and CM of Andhra Pradesh Chandrababu Naidu has said that the state had introduced SC categorisation in 1997, adding that social justice should prevail. He said that TDP had already written a letter to the then Prime Minister on October 10, 2012, with an appeal to introduce a Bill in Parliament on SC categorisation to amend the Constitution.
Against this backdrop, the ruling establishment led by PM Narendra Modi, is likely to derive political mileage by introducing a Bill for structured quota regime in the country to win over its lost ground among the underprivileged castes that have been so far lagging behind the dominant castes and their political leaders representing the politics of social justice. BJP would like to criticise the former Congress government for not bringing such a legislation at the national level.
However, it would not be so easy for the BJP and NDA allies to derive significant political mileage against the INDIA bloc parties. For example, the Congress ruled Telangana’s Chief Minister Revanth Reddy has already announced that his state will be the first to implement Supreme Court categorisation verdict. Rahul Gandhi and other political parties in INDIA bloc have been demanding the Caste Census to ascertain how much share every community have in the national resources.
India should expect a new socio-political twist in the months to come. Political parties will need to address their respective constituencies in the new light after the Supreme Court verdict, which may trigger a new socio-political alliance at the ground level too. (IPA Service)