After the Supreme Court's historic verdict on the sub-categorization of SC and ST reservations, the communities are expressing joy.
The summary of the judgment is that the state governments have the power to sub-categorize the reservations allotted to SCs and STs in admissions in educational institutions and government jobs.
What is the background of the case?
1975: The Punjab government issues a notification dividing its 25% SC reservation into two categories. It was one of the first instances of existing reservations being ‘sub-classified’ by a state. While the notification remained in force for nearly 30 years, it ran into legal hurdles in 2004.
2004: Supreme Court strikes down Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes (Rationalisation of Reservations) Act, 2000, citing violation of the right to equality in the E.V. Chinnaiah v State of Andhra Pradesh case.
2005 – 5 Judge Constitution bench delivered the judgment in the case of EV Chennaiah vs AP Govt. It is revealed that only the Parliament has the power to add or remove any caste from the SC list and not the state legislatures.
2006 - Punjab government passed a law giving SC quota 50 percent to Valmiki and Majhabi Sikhs in government jobs. Government attempts to reintroduce sub-categorisation through the Punjab Scheduled Caste and Backward Classes (Reservation in Services) Act, 2006, but it was struck down in 2010.
2010 - Punjab and Haryana High Court verdict invalidating SC sub-classification. Court stated that the government’s decision is contrary to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the 2004 case of EV EV Chennaiah vs. AP Govt.
2010 - Punjab & Haryana High Court, in Dr. Kishan Pal vs. State of Punjab, struck down the 1975 notification, supporting the E.V. Chennaiah vs government of Andhra Pradesh case decision.
2010 - The Punjab government challenged the High Court verdict in the Supreme Court.
2010 - 22 petitions filed in Supreme Court. Manda Krishna Madiga, founder president of Madiga Reservations Porata Samithi (MRPS) also filed the petition.
2014: Supreme Court refers the matter to a five-judge constitution bench, questioning the correctness of the 2004 E.V. Chennaiah decision.
2020: The Constitution bench holds that the 2004 decision needs reconsideration, rejecting the idea of SCs being a homogeneous group and acknowledging the existence of "unequal" within the list. The concept of the "creamy layer" was also recommended by the Supreme Court for SC and ST. Five-judge Constitution Bench transferred the case to the Extent Bench
2024 - A Apex Court bench headed by the CJI heard the cases and reserved judgment.
2024 – The 7 Judge Constitution bench headed by CJI DY Chandrachud gave ruling (6:1verdict) that States have power to sub-categorize. Court overruled 2005 judgment that had held that state governments had no power to create sub-categories of SCs for the purpose of reservation.
What is the Sub-categorisation?
Sub-categorisation refers to the division or classification of a larger category into smaller, more specific subcategories based on certain criteria or characteristics.
In the context of SC in India, sub-categorisation may involve further classification within the SC group based on factors such as socioeconomic status or historical disadvantages.
Madiga Community's struggle in Telangana
The Madiga community, constituting 50% of SCs in Telangana, has faced challenges in accessing government benefits intended for SCs due to dominance by the Mala community.
Despite their substantial population, the Madiga community argued that it has been excluded from SC-related initiatives.
They have been struggling since 1994 for the sub-categorisation of SCs and it was this demand that first led to the formation of the Justice P. Ramachandra Raju Commission in 1996 and later a National Commission in 2007.
Sub-quota demands across States
SC communities in various states have reported similar challenges, leading to the formation of commissions by both State and Union governments.
States like Punjab, Bihar, and Tamil Nadu attempted sub-categorisation at the state level, but these efforts are currently tied up in legal battles.
Constitutional Stance
Articles 341 and 342: It grants powers to the President to notify SC and ST lists and to Parliament to create these lists.
The President has the power to create the SC list (Article 341), and states cannot interfere or disturb it, including through sub-classification.
Issue of Sub-quota in various States
Sub-classification will impact various communities across states.
Balmikis and Mazhabi Sikhs in Punjab
Madiga in Andhra Pradesh & Telangana
Paswans in Bihar
Jatavs in Uttar Pradesh
Arundhatiyars in TamilNadu
Right (SC) and Left (SC) communities in Karnataka