The Supreme Court took strong exception to a woman, deemed by the State of Tamil Nadu to be a Christian convert, allegedly claiming to practice Hinduism for availing quota in job appointments for scheduled caste (SC) communities. “Would amount to fraud on the Constitution.”: the Bench made it clear that if the purpose of conversion/ reconversion is only to derive the benefit of reservation, the same cannot be allowed since it will defeat the objective of providing quota to the socially backward communities.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India, on Tuesday (Nov 26), issued a strong statement against individuals converting or claiming reconversion to another religion solely to secure reservation benefits.
The court’s remarks came in response to a case involving a woman in Tamil Nadu, deemed a Christian by the state, who asserted that she practiced Hinduism to qualify for job reservations designated for Scheduled Caste (SC) communities.
A Bench comprising Justices Pankaj Mithal and R. Mahadevan ruled that leveraging conversion or reconversion for reservation advantages undermines the foundational principles of social justice.
The Bench observed:
“If the purpose of conversion is largely to derive the benefits of reservation but not with any actual belief on the other religion, the same cannot be permitted, as the extension of benefits of reservation to people with such ulterior motive will only defeat the social ethos of the policy of reservation … the conferment of Scheduled Caste communal status to the appellant, who is a Christian by religion, but claims to be still embracing Hinduism only for the purpose of availing reservation in employment, would go against the very object of reservation and would amount to fraud on the Constitution.”
This ruling was made while dismissing an appeal by C. Selvarani against a January 2023 verdict from the Madras High Court. The case revolved around Selvarani’s claim to belong to the Valluvan caste, a Scheduled Caste under Hinduism, to secure a reserved job position.
However, the Tamil Nadu government refuted her claim following an official verification process.
Chronology of Events
- Initial Claim: Selvarani applied for a clerk position under the SC category, asserting her Hindu Valluvan caste identity.
- State Rejection: The State of Tamil Nadu rejected her claim after field verification, citing that she was born a Christian and had no documented evidence of reconversion to Hinduism.
- High Court Decision: The Madras High Court upheld the State’s findings, refusing to annul the appointment of the selected candidate.
- Supreme Court Appeal: Selvarani escalated her plea to the Supreme Court, which ultimately upheld the High Court’s verdict.
Supreme Court’s Examination
The apex court meticulously reviewed the evidence, which included:
- Parental Records: Documentation of Selvarani’s parents’ marriage under the Indian Christian Marriage Act.
- Baptismal Evidence: Proof of her baptism into Christianity.
- Religious Practices: Records indicating her continued participation in Christian religious practices.
The court concluded that Selvarani’s claim of reconversion to Hinduism lacked substantive proof.
As the Bench remarked:
“In the present case, the appellant was a born Christian and could not be associated with any caste. In any case, upon conversion to Christianity, one loses her caste and cannot be identified by it. As the factum of reconversion is disputed, there must be more than a mere claim. The conversion had not happened by any ceremony or through Arya Samaj. No public declaration was effected. There is nothing on record to show that she or her family has reconverted to Hinduism and on the contrary, there is a factual finding that the appellant still professes Christianity.”
Key Takeaways from the Court’s Ruling
- Secular Principles: The court emphasized India’s secular fabric, highlighting that every individual has the right to freely practice and profess their chosen religion.
- Dual Religious Claims: It condemned the appellant’s attempt to claim dual religious identities to gain undue benefits, stating:
“One converts to a different religion, when he/she is genuinely inspired by its principles, tenets and spiritual thoughts. However, in the instant case, the evidence presented clearly demonstrates that the appellant professes Christianity and actively practices the faith by attending church regularly.”
- Fraud on Constitution: The court deemed the appellant’s actions a deliberate fraud, aimed at manipulating constitutional provisions for personal gain.
The Supreme Court’s ruling reinforces the sanctity of reservation policies, asserting that these provisions are intended for the genuine upliftment of socially and educationally backward communities.
It firmly established that exploiting religious identity for such benefits is both unethical and unconstitutional, sending a clear message against misusing affirmative action policies.
- For Selvarani: Senior Advocate N.S. Nappinai led the defense, supported by advocates V. Balaji, Asaithambi M.S.M., Atul Sharma, C. Kannan, Nizamuddin, B. Dhananjay, and Rakesh K. Sharma.
- For Tamil Nadu: Advocates Aravindh S., Akshay Gupta, Abbas B., and Tharane S. represented the State.
CASE TITLE:
C Selvarani v Special Secretary Cum District Collector and ors.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on CJI
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
