Sub-Classification of SC/STs

Recent Judgment

In a significant ruling (State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh), the Supreme Court of India, through a seven-judge bench, has allowed states to create sub-classifications within Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) categories. This decision aims to provide better protections and targeted benefits to the most backward communities within these categories via fixed sub-quotas.

Background Context

• Historical Efforts:
• States have long sought to give wider protection to the most underrepresented communities within the SC and ST categories, advocating for separate quotas within existing reservations (15% for SCs and 7.5% for STs).
• For example, in 1975, the Punjab government prioritized the Balmiki and Mazhabi Sikh communities in SC reservations, which led to legal challenges and public outrage.
• Previous Legal Precedents:
• E.V. Chinnaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2004):
• The Supreme Court struck down the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes (Rationalization of Reservations) Act, 2000, arguing that sub-classification violated Article 14 (right to equality) and Article 341 of the Constitution. It held that the SC list must be considered a single, homogeneous group due to the shared historical discrimination they face.
• Dr. Kishan Pal v. State of Punjab (2006):
• Following the E.V. Chinnaiah judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court invalidated the 1975 notification favoring certain SC communities. A new law passed in 2006 was also declared unconstitutional.
• Davinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2014):
• This case questioned the validity of the E.V. Chinnaiah ruling. The bench recognized disparities within SCs and STs, prompting the formation of a larger seven-judge bench for a conclusive ruling.

Implications of the Ruling

• Sub-Classifications: The Supreme Court’s ruling allows states to categorize and create sub-quotas for specific communities within the broader SC and ST classifications, recognizing the variations in socio-economic status and educational backwardness among them.
• Policy Implementation: States can now design policies that target the needs of the most disadvantaged groups within SC and ST categories, potentially improving access to education and employment opportunities for these communities.
• Legal Framework: This ruling may lead to revisions in state-level legislation and practices concerning reservation policies, allowing for a more nuanced approach to affirmative action

Key Issues Addressed by the Supreme Court and Final Verdict

The Supreme Court's landmark decision (State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh) marks a significant shift in India's reservation policy by permitting states to create sub-classifications within Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST). This 6-1 ruling overturns the previous E.V. Chinnaiah (2004) decision, which maintained that SC/STs form a homogenous group.

1. Treatment of Castes in the SC List

• Legal Fiction of SCs: The Court stated that the Presidential list of SCs represents a "legal fiction" that cannot ignore the internal differences among the SCs. It acknowledged the existence of a "heterogeneous group" of castes with varying degrees of backwardness.
• Internal Differences: Inclusion in the President’s List does not mean SCs are uniform; there are significant disparities among different communities.

2. Permissibility of Sub-Classification

• Socio-Economic Disparities: The Court recognized that some castes within the SC category are more disadvantaged than others, justifying sub-classification.
• Article 14 Compliance: The Court ruled that sub-classification does not violate Article 14, as it aims to ensure that laws apply to those "similarly situated." This promotes substantive equality over formal equality, addressing inherent differences to achieve fairness.
• Empowerment Under Articles 15(4) and 16(4): States have the authority to identify varying degrees of social backwardness and provide special provisions, including reservations.

3. Yardstick for Sub-Classification

• Data-Driven Decisions: Sub-classification requires "quantifiable and demonstrable data" to highlight levels of backwardness. States must provide empirical evidence and a reasonable rationale for classification, which can be tested in court.
• Exclusion of 100% Reservations: States cannot earmark 100% of reservations for any sub-class to the exclusion of others listed under the Presidential notification.

4. Application of the 'Creamy Layer' Principle

• Exclusion of the Creamy Layer: Justice Gavai, supported by three other judges, advocated for excluding the "creamy layer" among SCs and STs from reservation benefits. Currently, this principle applies only to Other Backward Classes (OBCs).
• Potential Variance in Criteria: The criteria for defining the creamy layer for SCs/STs may differ from those for OBCs, with past judgments suggesting that those from the creamy layer should not benefit from affirmative action.

Dissenting Opinion

• Justice Bela Trivedi's Dissent: Justice Trivedi contended that states lack the authority to alter the Presidential list under Article 341, emphasizing that changes should come from Parliament. She warned that sub-classifications could politicize and undermine the constitutional intent of affirmative action.

Committee for Sub-Categorization

• Formation of a Committee: In January 2024, the Union government established a five-member committee led by Cabinet Secretary Rajiv Gauba to assess fair distribution of benefits for sub-categorization of SCs.
• OBC Sub-Categorization: The Justice G. Rohini-led Commission for OBC sub-categorization submitted its report to the Central Government in August 2023.

Potential Implications of Sub-Categorization

Positive Implications

• Targeted Benefits:
• Sub-categorization ensures that reservation benefits reach those who need them most, addressing specific challenges faced by the most disadvantaged groups and promoting social and economic mobility.
• Enhanced Representation:
• It can lead to better representation of historically marginalized communities in education and employment, fostering a more inclusive and equitable society.
• Better Policy Formulation and Implementation:
• The requirement for detailed data collection on sub-castes can inform more effective and tailored policies, ensuring resources are allocated where they are needed most.
• Strengthened Social Cohesion:
• By promoting a fairer distribution of benefits, sub-categorization can enhance feelings of justice and inclusion among SC/ST communities and foster harmony in the broader society.

Negative Implications

• Division Within SC Communities:
• Sub-categorization may create conflicts and competition for resources among different subgroups, potentially undermining the solidarity and unity that have historically characterized SC communities.
• Administrative Complexity:
• Identifying eligible subgroups and collecting data can introduce significant bureaucratic challenges, leading to delays in implementation and potential inefficiencies.
• Political Implications:
• The political sensitivity surrounding the issue may lead to protests and resistance from various stakeholders, complicating the implementation process.
• Data Availability and Accuracy:
• Collecting and analyzing accurate data on the socio-economic and educational status of different subgroups can be challenging, particularly in regions with limited infrastructure and resources.
• Judicial Scrutiny:
• Policies related to sub-categorization may face legal challenges, as altering the existing reservation framework could result in prolonged court battles and uncertainty regarding their implementation.

Constitutional Provisions Supporting Weaker Sections

The Indian Constitution contains several provisions aimed at promoting the welfare and advancement of weaker sections, particularly Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs).

• Article 15(4): Allows the state to make special provisions for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens, including SCs and STs.
• Article 16(4A): Provides for reservation in promotions for SCs and STs in public services.
• Article 17: Abolishes untouchability, prohibiting discrimination based on caste.
• Article 46: Mandates the state to promote the educational and economic interests of weaker sections, particularly SCs and STs, and to protect them from social injustice and exploitation.
• Article 330 and Article 332: Ensure reservation of seats for SCs and STs in the House of the People and state legislative assemblies.
• Article 335: Requires that the claims of SCs and STs be considered in appointments to services and posts while maintaining administrative efficiency.
• Article 338: Establishes the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) and Scheduled Tribes (NCST) to monitor and evaluate the implementation of policies for these communities.
• Part IX and Part IXA: Provide for the reservation of seats for SCs and STs in local bodies, ensuring their representation in grassroots governance.

Presidential List

• Central List: The list of SCs and STs is notified by the President under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution.
• Parliamentary Consent: Any addition or exclusion from this list requires the consent of Parliament; states cannot unilaterally alter it.
• Variations Across States: The designation of a caste as SC in one state may not apply in another. This state-wise variation helps mitigate disputes regarding reservations.
• Exclusions: Certain regions, such as Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, and Lakshadweep, do not have specific communities listed as SCs.

Prominent Weaker Communities by State

• Maharashtra: Mahar, Matang, Gond, Bhil, Dhule
• Rajasthan: Meghwal, Bairwa, Jatav, Meena, Bhil
• Odisha: Khond, Santal, Gond, Pan, Dom, Dhoba, Ganda, Kandra, Bauri
• Chhattisgarh: Gond, Kawar/Kanwar, Oraon, Bairwa, Raidas
• Madhya Pradesh: Balai, Bhil, Gond
• West Bengal: Rajbanshi, Matua, Bagdi
• Gujarat: Vankar, Rohit, Bhil, Halpati
• Assam: Bodo, Karbi
• Tripura: Debbarma community, Das, Badyakar, Shabdakar, Sarkar
• Uttarakhand: Harijan, Balmiki, Jaunsari, Tharu

Way Forward

The sub-categorization of Scheduled Castes (SCs) aims to address internal inequalities and empower the most disadvantaged groups. However, it is essential to navigate the associated challenges thoughtfully to ensure that the intended benefits are realized without exacerbating existing disparities.

• Inclusive Policy Development:
• Engage with a wide range of stakeholders, including community leaders, social scientists, and policymakers, to ensure that the sub-categorization process is inclusive and considers the unique needs of different groups within the SC community.
• Data Collection and Research:
• Invest in comprehensive data collection to assess the socio-economic conditions of various subgroups. This will help in understanding their specific challenges and tailoring policies effectively.
• Monitoring and Evaluation:
• Establish robust mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating the impact of sub-categorization policies. Regular assessments can help identify unintended consequences and areas for improvement.
• Addressing Administrative Challenges:
• Simplify administrative processes to reduce bureaucratic delays. Implement technology-driven solutions for data collection and resource allocation to improve efficiency.
• Fostering Unity:
• Promote initiatives that encourage solidarity among different subgroups within the SC community. This can help mitigate potential conflicts and competition for resources.
• Legal Framework:
• Develop a clear legal framework to address potential challenges related to sub-categorization. Ensuring that policies align with constitutional provisions will be vital for their sustainability.
• Public Awareness Campaigns:
• Launch campaigns to educate the public about the purpose and benefits of sub-categorization. Building a supportive environment can reduce resistance and promote understanding.
• Periodic Reviews:
• As suggested in the judgment, consider periodic reviews of the reservation policy to assess its relevance and effectiveness. This can help move towards a more equitable society while gradually reducing reliance on caste-based reservations.
• Promoting a Casteless Society:
• While addressing immediate disparities, also focus on long-term goals of social integration and reducing caste-based identities. Encourage dialogue and initiatives that promote equality beyond reservations.