The Supreme Court of India has granted six weeks to the Centre and States to file responses on a plea seeking exclusion of the creamy layer from SC/ST reservations. The Court clarified that it is not examining the issue on merits and wants inputs from all stakeholders before proceeding further.
The Supreme Court on Thursday heard a writ petition seeking the exclusion of the “creamy layer” from reservation benefits given to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. However, the Court clearly stated that it was not examining the issue on merits at this stage and was only dealing with procedural aspects of the case.
The matter was heard by a Bench of Supreme Court of India comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vijay Bishnoi.
During the hearing, the Bench took on record several intervention applications, including one filed by the All India SC/ST Employees of the Railways, which opposed the plea. While allowing the impleadment, the Chief Justice remarked that the Court would require complete details of the members represented by the intervening association.
Expressing surprise, the CJI noted that even lower-category government employees had come forward to oppose the petition.
“We are amazed that even Class 3 and Class 4 employees are opposing this,”
the CJI observed while permitting the intervention.
The petition was argued by Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, who submitted that the original purpose of reservation for SC/ST communities was to uplift the poorest and most backward sections.
Referring to the Constituent Assembly debates, he argued that reservation was never intended to benefit the children of politically powerful individuals.
“Cabinet ministers, five-time ministers, the Constituent Assembly debates are clear. It was meant for the very poor persons, not the son of a minister,”
he argued.
At the same time, the Bench made it clear that it was not entering into the substance of the issue.
“Today, we are not hearing anything on merits,”
the CJI stated, adding that the matter involved serious policy considerations. The Court emphasized that it wanted to hear the views of all stakeholders before taking any further step.
“We would like to have the opinion of every stakeholder. These are also policy matters,”
the Bench said.
All intervention applications were formally allowed by the Court. Counsel appearing for the Union of India sought time to file a detailed reply, which was granted. The Court directed the Union government to file its counter affidavit within six weeks and also asked the State governments to submit their responses within the same period.
The plea seeks exclusion of the creamy layer from SC/ST reservations to ensure that benefits reach the genuinely disadvantaged sections and to uphold constitutional values of justice, equality, fraternity, administrative efficiency, and national unity.
It states,
“Reservation under the Constitution was conceived as a remedial and compensatory measure to address historical injustice, social exclusion, and structural inequality suffered by Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The Constituent Assembly Debates clearly demonstrate that reservation was never intended to be a permanent or unconditional entitlement. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar repeatedly stated that reservation is not a privilege but a remedy for injustice created by the social system and that equality does not mean identical treatment of unequal. Late Sh. Jaipal Singh and V.I. Muniswamy Pillai emphasized that reservation was meant to uplift those who were backward in social, educational, and economic terms and not those who had already overcome such disadvantages,”
the plea states.
ALSO READ: ‘Constitution Not Permanent’: CJI BR Gavai Echoes Ambedkar’s Vision for Continuous Reform
The writ petition, filed through AOR Ashwani Kumar Dubey, further argues that non-exclusion of the creamy layer has serious national consequences. It claims that the present system fuels resentment between reserved and non-reserved categories and concentrates power and opportunities in the hands of a small elite within SC/ST communities.
“This weakens public faith in constitutional governance, threatens fraternity, and undermines administrative efficiency, which the Constitution expressly seeks to protect. Socially, the absence of creamy layer exclusion has resulted in internal stratification within SC/ST communities, creating a “class within a class.” Advanced families repeatedly corner reservation benefits, while the most backward and first-generation beneficiaries remain excluded. This perpetuates inequality within the reserved categories, deepens social stigma, and defeats the very purpose of social justice. Economically, reservation without creamy layer exclusion leads to misallocation of scarce public resources,”
it adds.
The plea also places reliance on the Supreme Court’s recent Constitution Bench decision in State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh, which held that Scheduled Castes are not a homogeneous group and that sub-classification is constitutionally permissible to ensure fair distribution of reservation benefits.
In that judgment, Justice Pankaj Mithal observed that reservation must evolve over time, should ordinarily be limited to the first generation, and must be periodically reviewed to exclude those who have already achieved parity.
Case Title:
Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India & Ors
Click Here to Read More Reports On SC/ST Quota
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
