SC/ST Reservation: Supreme Court Rules Separate Quotas Permissible for More Backward Castes

On Thursday, August 1, the Supreme Court delivered a significant ruling concerning Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST). A constitutional bench of seven judges, led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, decided by a 6:1 majority that separate quotas within the SC/ST categories can be allocated to more backward sub-groups. The bench acknowledged that within the SC/ST reservation framework, it is permissible to allocate distinct shares to different castes. The decision came in response to a case where the Punjab High Court had annulled a 2010 law that allocated half of the SC reservation to Valmiki and Mazhabi Sikh communities. An appeal was filed against this decision to the Supreme Court. The Court's ruling emphasizes that certain castes within SC/ST categories are significantly more backward and require targeted empowerment. The Court clarified that evidence of backwardness for any sub-group must be established, and representation in education and employment can serve as a basis for this classification. Simply having a larger number of individuals in a caste is not sufficient grounds for sub-categorization. The Court recognized that the SC category is not homogeneous and that some castes have faced more severe discrimination. It allowed that similar to the OBC sub-classification sanctioned in the Indira Sahni case, a similar system could be applied to SCs. However, the Court stressed that states must collect data before implementing any sub-categorization of reservations. The Court's judgment highlighted the disparity faced by different sub-groups within the SC/ST categories, drawing an analogy to the struggle between those trying to get inside a crowded train compartment and those already inside who block others from entering. The ruling underscores the need to address the unique challenges faced by various sub-groups within the SC/