New Delhi, Aug 1 :
In a landmark judgment, a seven-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that states are empowered to make sub-classification within Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes for granting quotas in jobs and education for the more underprivileged among the marginalized communities.
A bench, comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, Justice BR Gavai, Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Bela M Trivedi, Justice Pankaj Mithal, Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Satish Chandra Mishra, passed the verdict by 6:1 majority.
It was hearing 23 petitions, including the lead one filed by the Punjab government challenging a 2010 verdict of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
Justice Gavai said that there are categories within the SC/STs that have faced oppression for centuries and opined that the state must evolve a policy to identify the creamy layer among the SC/ST category.
The bench delivered six separate judgments and held that further sub-classification of SCs and STs by states can be permitted to ensure the grant of quota to more backward castes among these groups.
The majority verdict said the basis of sub-classification has to be justified by “quantifiable and demonstrable data by the states, which cannot act on its whims”.
Justice Trivedi, however, passed a dissenting judgment and said that the states cannot tinker with the Scheduled Caste list notified under Article 341 of the Constitution.
Justice Trivedi said that the state’s action to provide reservation even if well-intentioned cannot be justified by the Supreme Court using powers under Article 142.
She said that the affirmative action of states has to be within the constitutional fold.
The top court said members of SCs and STs are often unable to climb up the ladder due to the systemic discrimination faced by them.
The top court overruled its 2004 judgment of a five-judge bench in the EV Chinnaiah case in which it was held that SCs and STs are homogenous groups and hence, states cannot further sub-classify them to grant quota inside quota for more deprived and weaker castes in these groups.
The Chinnaiah judgment held that any ‘sub-classification’ of SCs would violate Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution.
The 2004 verdict stated that only the Parliament, and not the state legislatures, can exclude castes deemed to be SC from the Presidential List under Article 341 of the Constitution.
The Punjab government, in 2011, had approached the top court assailing the high court’s verdict, saying the apex court’s 2004 judgment did not apply to it as there is no ST population in their state.
Taking up the plea of the Punjab government, a five-judge bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra (since retired), on August 27, 2020, had differed with the Chinnaiah judgment and referred it for adjudication by a larger bench of seven judges or more for an authoritative pronouncement.
The bench after hearing arguments from all the parties had reserved its judgment in February this year and had said, “There is heterogeneity in terms of past occupation social status and other indicators may be different for different castes inside the Scheduled Castes.So, the degree of social and economic backwardness may vary from one person or caste to another,” the top court had said.
The Central Government had submitted before the court that it was in favour of doing sub-classification among Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes.
In the central government-funded higher education institutions, 22.5 per cent of available seats are reserved for SCs and 7.5 per cent for ST students.
The same yardstick is applied in the case of public employment as well.
