SC Dismisses Review Petitions, Reaffirms Permissibility of 'Quota within Quota'

The Supreme Court rejected a bunch of pleas seeking review of its Constitution Bench judgment that had held that sub-classification within Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) would be permissible for providing the benefits of affirmative action.

After scrutinising the review petitions, a 7-judge Constitution Bench headed by CJI D.Y. Chandrachud noted that "there is no apparent error on the face of the record. No case for review under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules 2013 has been made out. The review petitions are accordingly dismissed."

It was in this landmark verdict delivered on August 1 that the majority suggested the creamy layer principle, applicable to SCs and STs for availing quota benefits with a caveat that while providing for sub-classification, the government would not be entitled to reserve 100 per cent seats available for SC/ST in favour of a particular sub-class to the exclusion of other castes in the List.

It reversed its 2004 judgment, by which it had decided to refrain from giving preferential treatment to certain sub-castes within scheduled castes (SCs), with a 6:1 verdict.

In his elaborate opinion, Justice B.R. Gavai observed: "When the 9-Judge Bench in Indra Sawhney held that applicability of such a test (creamy layer test) insofar as Other Backward Classes are concerned would advance equality as enshrined in the Constitution, then why such a test should not also be made applicable to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes."

Can a child of IAS/IPS or Civil Service officers be equated with the child of a deprived member belonging to Scheduled Castes, studying in a Gram Panchayat/Zilla Parishad school in a village? " Justice Gavai questioned.

Opinion for the same has been written by Justice Gavai who supported Justices Vikram Nath, Pankaj Mithal, and Satish Chandra Sharma. According to the opinion of Justice Gavai, it was stressed that the government must evolve a policy for identifying the creamy layer even from the SCs and STs so as to exclude them from the benefit of affirmative action.

In the case of E.V. Chinnaiah vs State of Andhra Pradesh-which has been set aside-a 5-judge Constitution Bench in 2004 had declared that members of the reserved category groups form a homogeneous class incapable of further regrouping or classification.

Just two days after the SC ruling in August this year, the Union Cabinet meeting decided by PM Narendra Modi went into great details over the judgment of the top court and declared that no provision of the Constitution provided for "creamy layer" within SCs and STs quota.

Union information and broadcasting minister Ashwini Vaishnaw said the NDA government is committed to the provisions of the Constitution and "according to the Constitution given by B.R. Ambedkar, there is no provision for a creamy layer in the SC-ST reservation".