According to the cause list, a seven-judge Constitution bench, led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and including Justices B.R. Gavai, Vikram Nath, Bela Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra, and Satish Chandra Sharma, will hear the case at 1:35 PM.
New Delhi: On Sep 24: The Supreme Court is set to review a series of petitions on Tuesday concerning its ruling that states can constitutionally create sub-classifications within the Scheduled Castes (SCs), a group that is socially diverse, to facilitate reservation benefits.
According to the cause list, a seven-judge Constitution bench, led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and including Justices B.R. Gavai, Vikram Nath, Bela Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra, and Satish Chandra Sharma, will hear the case at 1:35 PM.
On August 1, the Supreme Court affirmed that states are constitutionally authorized to implement sub-classifications within the SCs, which consist of a socially and educationally heterogeneous class, for the purpose of assisting those castes that are relatively more backward.
The court emphasized that any sub-classification must be based on “quantifiable and demonstrable data” regarding backwardness and representation in government jobs, rather than on “whims” or “political expediency.”
This seven-judge bench, by a 6:1 majority, overturned a previous five-judge bench ruling from 2004 in the E.V. Chinnaiah vs. State of Andhra Pradesh case, which maintained that SCs form a homogeneous class that cannot be sub-classified. While five judges agreed with the Chief Justice’s opinion, Justice Trivedi dissented, asserting that only Parliament has the authority to modify the SC list, and that states lack the power to make such changes. She regarded SCs as a “homogeneous class” that cannot be further divided.
In overturning the Chinnaiah decision, the Chief Justice clarified that the purpose of any affirmative action, including sub-classification, is to ensure “substantive equality of opportunity for backward classes.” He stated that the state can sub-classify based on a lack of representation for certain castes, provided it can demonstrate that this inadequacy is a result of the group’s backwardness.
The ruling requires states to gather data on underrepresentation in government jobs, as this serves as a key indicator of backwardness.
The issue of sub-classification arose after several states, including Punjab, enacted laws to create sub-categories within the SCs to allocate additional quota benefits to specific castes.
The Supreme Court had reserved its judgment on February 8 regarding the appeals challenging the Chinnaiah ruling, which determined that all SCs, having faced ostracization and discrimination for centuries, represented a homogeneous class that could not be sub-categorized.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
