SC verdict on SC/ST reservation : What are the political implications?

Summary

In this episode of 'Talking Politics,' the focus is on the Indian Supreme Court's recent verdict allowing state governments to subclassify scheduled casts for more preferential treatment. The judgment suggests excluding the 'creamy layer' from reservation benefits to ensure real equality. The impact of this decision on Indian politics is explored, including potential strategies for political parties and the challenges of implementing the 'creamy layer' concept within scheduled cast communities.

Takeaways

• 🏛️ The Supreme Court of India ruled that state governments have the right to subclassify scheduled casts to provide more preferential treatment in public employment and education.
• 👨‍⚖️ Four judges suggested extending the 'creamy layer' principle to scheduled casts and tribes to exclude affluent individuals from reservation benefits.
• 📜 The verdict indicates a move towards recognizing the internal diversity and inequality within scheduled cast communities.
• 🙅‍♂️ Justice Chandrachud was silent on the creamy layer opinion but agreed with the states' right to subclassify.
• 🗣️ Justice BR Gait dissented, arguing that states do not have the power to alter the presidential list of scheduled casts and tribes.
• 📊 The court emphasized the need for empirical data to justify subclassifying a group within scheduled casts as requiring more benefits.
• 🚫 The judgment overruled a 2005 verdict, allowing states to subclassify without violating the constitutional provision that rests with Parliament.
• 🔄 The political impact of this verdict is complex and may lead to strategic realignment of political parties to appeal to specific sub-groups within the scheduled cast communities.
• 🔍 The creamy layer concept, if applied to scheduled casts, presents a significant ideological and administrative challenge for political parties.
• ⏳ The verdict's implications for politics and policy are significant and will require careful consideration and political will to implement effectively.

Q & A

What was the main verdict of the Supreme Court regarding the subclassification of Scheduled Castes?

The Supreme Court ruled that state governments have the right to subclassify Scheduled Castes notified in the presidential list to provide them more preferential treatment in public employment and education than other communities.

What is the 'creamy layer' principle mentioned in the script?

The 'creamy layer' principle refers to the concept of excluding affluent individuals or families from the benefits of reservation to make room for the really underprivileged within these classes.

Which judges supported the idea of considering a 'creamy layer' within the Scheduled Castes?

Justice BR Gait and three other judges, Justices Vikram Pankaj M, and Saish Chandra Sharma, supported the idea of considering a 'creamy layer' within the Scheduled Castes.

What was the dissenting opinion regarding the subclassification of Scheduled Castes?

Justice Bavredi was the dissenting member who argued that states did not have the power to tinker with the presidential list of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

How does the Supreme Court's verdict impact the political landscape in India?

The verdict could lead to a more nuanced approach to reservations, potentially breaking the monopoly over the political support of these communities from an umbrella alliance to aggregating individual communities.

What was the previous stance on subclassification as per the 2005 E.V. Chinnaiah judgment?

The 2005 E.V. Chinnaiah judgment held that subclassification amounted to tinkering with the presidential list by the state legislature and was therefore violative of Article 3412.

What does the Supreme Court's verdict mean for the states in terms of reservation policies?

The verdict empowers state governments to subcategorize Scheduled Castes within their reservation policies, potentially leading to more targeted and equitable distribution of benefits.

What is the potential challenge for political parties in implementing the 'creamy layer' concept for Scheduled Castes?

The challenge lies in the ideological and practical leap required to apply the 'creamy layer' concept to Scheduled Castes, which traditionally face a different level of deprivation compared to Other Backward Classes.

How might the verdict influence future electoral strategies of political parties?

Political parties may need to reconsider their electoral strategies by focusing on specific subcategories within Scheduled Castes to garner support, rather than relying on a broad umbrella approach.

What administrative challenges does the verdict pose for state governments?

State governments will face the challenge of collecting empirical data to support claims for subclassification and ensuring that the process of identifying the 'creamy layer' is fair and effective.

How did the verdict come about, and what were the legal considerations?

The verdict was the result of a reference made by a seven-judge bench in 2020 to examine the constitutionality of certain state reservation acts. The court considered the need for acknowledging and remedying inter-inequality among Scheduled Castes, as well as the potential for political tinkering.

Outlines

00:00

🏛️ Supreme Court Verdict on Subclassification and Creamy Layer

The video discusses a significant Supreme Court verdict in India that allows state governments to subclassify scheduled casts for more preferential treatment in public employment and education. The court, with a majority judgment, supports the idea of treating unequals unequally to achieve real equality. Four out of seven judges also suggested applying the creamy layer principle to scheduled casts and tribes, aiming to exclude affluent individuals from reservation benefits. This could reshape the political landscape by addressing intra-group inequality within the scheduled cast community.

05:02

🗳️ Political Ramifications of the Verdict

The political impact of the Supreme Court's decision is analyzed, noting the slow initial reactions from major political parties. The verdict could potentially disrupt traditional political alliances and strategies, as it enables states to further differentiate within scheduled cast communities. The discussion highlights the BJP's past advocacy for subcategorization in certain cases, such as the Mika community in Telangana. The creamy layer concept, however, poses a significant ideological and practical challenge for political parties, as it requires excluding economically well-off individuals from reservation benefits, which could be a contentious move.

10:05

🤔 Future Political Strategy and the Verdict's Administrative Challenges

The video concludes by pondering the future political strategies that might emerge in response to the verdict. It suggests that while the decision provides states with more autonomy, it also presents administrative complexities and political risks. Political parties must now decide whether to use their authority to implement subcategorization and the creamy layer concept, which could be politically divisive. The verdict's long-term effects on Indian politics and policy remain to be seen, with the potential to significantly alter the dynamics of social justice and political representation.

Keywords

💡Supreme Court Verdict

The Supreme Court Verdict mentioned in the script refers to a significant legal decision made by the highest court in India. In this context, it pertains to the ruling that state governments have the right to subclassify scheduled casts, which is a major development in Indian domestic politics. The verdict is central to the video's theme as it discusses the implications of this decision on the political landscape, particularly regarding affirmative action and reservation policies.

💡Scheduled Casts

Scheduled Casts, or SCs, are a group of historically disadvantaged castes in India, recognized by the Constitution and eligible for affirmative action policies. The script discusses the Supreme Court's decision to allow states to subclassify these groups, which could lead to more nuanced and targeted policies for different communities within the SC category. The concept is integral to understanding the video's exploration of the judicial and political dimensions of caste-based reservations.

💡Creamy Layer

The 'creamy layer' is a term used to describe the more affluent and socially advanced sections within socially and educationally backward classes, who are often excluded from certain reservation benefits. The script highlights a separate opinion by four judges suggesting the extension of this principle to scheduled casts and tribes. This concept is crucial for understanding the debate around economic versus social backwardness and the potential for more equitable distribution of benefits within reservation policies.

💡Subclassification

Subclassification, as discussed in the script, refers to the process of further dividing the broad categories of scheduled casts and tribes to provide more specific and targeted benefits. The Supreme Court's decision to allow states to subclassify scheduled casts is a significant point of discussion in the video, as it could lead to changes in how reservation policies are implemented and who benefits from them.

💡Affirmative Action

Affirmative action policies in India are designed to redress historical disadvantages faced by certain communities, including scheduled casts and tribes. The script discusses the Supreme Court's verdict in the context of these policies, emphasizing the need for 'real equality' and the potential for states to provide more preferential treatment to certain groups within the scheduled casts. This concept is central to understanding the video's analysis of the verdict's impact on social justice and political dynamics.

💡Political Tinkering

Political tinkering refers to the manipulation of policies or classifications for political gain, often by parties in power. The script mentions concerns about potential political tinkering by states to expand their vote banks through subclassifying scheduled casts. This concept is important for understanding the video's discussion of the political motivations and potential abuses related to the Supreme Court's verdict.

💡Empirical Data

Empirical data, in the context of the script, refers to the evidence or information that states must provide to justify the need for subclassifying scheduled casts or implementing the creamy layer principle. The Supreme Court's decision emphasizes the requirement for states to produce such data to support their claims, which is a key aspect of the video's discussion on the implementation of the verdict and the need for evidence-based policy-making.

💡Reservation

Reservation in India refers to the policy of setting aside a certain percentage of seats in educational institutions and government jobs for historically disadvantaged groups, including scheduled casts and tribes. The script discusses the Supreme Court's decision in relation to reservation policies, particularly the potential for states to provide more preferential treatment to certain groups within these categories. This concept is central to the video's analysis of the verdict's implications for social equity and political strategy.

💡Backward Classes

Backward classes in India are social groups that are considered to be socially and educationally disadvantaged. The script mentions the duty of the state to give preferential treatment to these classes, particularly those that are not adequately represented. This concept is important for understanding the video's discussion of the broader context of affirmative action and the challenges of defining and addressing social disadvantage.

💡Political Reactions

Political reactions, as discussed in the script, refer to the responses of various political parties and leaders to the Supreme Court's verdict. The video notes that reactions were slow to emerge and varied, with some regional parties expressing support while national parties like the Congress and BJP had not yet provided a considered response. This concept is significant for understanding the video's exploration of the verdict's potential impact on political alliances and strategies.

Highlights

The Supreme Court of India ruled that state governments have the right to subclassify scheduled casts for more preferential treatment.

A separate opinion by four judges suggested extending the creamy layer principle to scheduled casts and scheduled tribes.

The court aims to exclude affluent individuals from reservation benefits to make room for the underprivileged within these classes.

Justice BR Gay advocated for treating unequals unequally to achieve real equality as per the Constitution.

The majority judgment allows states to subclassify scheduled casts to provide more benefits to certain groups within the category.

Chief Justice Chandra Chur agreed that scheduled casts are not a uniform group and can be further subclassified.

The court overruled a 2005 verdict that considered subclassification as tinkering with the presidential list by state legislatures.

States must provide empirical data to support claims that a subclass requires more preferential treatment.

The judgment does not allow states to reserve 100% of seats for one group within the scheduled cast category.

The political impact of the verdict is yet to be seen, with initial reactions being slow and varied.

The verdict could lead to a breakdown of the monopoly over political support from umbrella alliances to individual communities.

The BJP has previously advocated for subcategorization within the scheduled cast category, specifically for the Mika community in Telangana.

The creamy layer concept, previously only applicable to OBCs, now poses a challenge for political parties ideologically and practically.

The Apex Court's verdict creates a politically and administratively complex situation for governments to navigate.

Political parties will need to consider whether to expend political capital on an issue that is administratively tricky and may not yield clear winners.

The verdict is expected to have a significant impact on politics, similar to the Mundle Commission report or the BJP's non-Yadav politics strategy.

Transcripts

hello and welcome to another episode of

talking politics uh on the Hindus

YouTube channel this is a show where we

go behind the scenes of stories making

the headlines in domestic politics now

this week we will be looking at the

impact the likely impact because it is

still working out the likly impact that

the Supreme Court's verdict that the

state governments have the right to

subclassify scheduled casts notified in

the presidential list and a separate

opinion by four judges that a creamy

layer in scheduled cast quas be

considered will have on Indian

[Music]

[Applause]

politics now uh let's first look at what

the Supreme Court has actually said on

Thursday a seven judge Constitution

bench of the Supreme Court headed by

Chief Justice of India Dy Chandra in a

majority judgment held that states have

a right to sub qualify schedule casts

notified in the presidential list in

order to provide them more preferential

treatment in public employment and

education than the other communities

included in that category now four of

the seven judges on the bench separately

said that the government should extend

the creamy layer principle uh to

scheduled casts and scheduled drives

like in the case of other backward class

classes category it is necessary uh it

is said that to exclude affluent

individuals or families from the

benefits of reservation and make room

for the really underprivileged within

these classes the state and I quote here

must evolve a policy for identifying the

creamy layer even from the schedule cast

and schedule tribes so as to exclude

them from the benefits of affirmative

action in my view only this and this

alone can achieve the real equality as

enshrined under the Constitution can a

child of an IAS IPS or Civil Service

Officer be equated with the child of a

disadvantaged member belonging to

schedule cast studying in a gr panchet

Zilla panchet School in a village these

are the words of Justice BR gay uh in

that opinion and his view on considering

a creamy lay within the sh cast

Community uh the presidential list of

scheduled casts was backed by three

other judges justices Vikram pankaj M

and saish Chandra Sharma who were on the

bench however uh uh justice chief

justice Chandra chur was silent on this

creamy layer opinion but uh he shared

the other bit that the states have the

right to subclassify with Justice Manoj

Mishra uh uh justice gay opined that

unequals have to be treated unequally to

bring real equality it is the duty of

the state he said to give preferential

treatment to backward classes uh who are

not adequately represented the only

dissenting member in the seven judge

bench uh on

subclassification was uh justice ba

tredi and saying that the states did not

have the power to Tinker with the

president itial list of scheduled casts

and scheduled tribes the Constitution

bench basically followed a reference

made by the seven judge bench in 2020 to

examine the constitutionality of Tamil

Nadu aruna's reservation Act of 209 and

the Punjab scheduled casts and backward

classes reservation and services Act of

2006 the latter gave pre preferential

quotas to balmiki and mzabi seeks the

Chief Justice of India D Chandra agreed

that scheduled casts were not an

indivisible monolith that scheduled cast

notified by the president under article

3411 of the Constitution was composed of

heterogeneous groups of casts races or

tribes with various degrees of

backwardness their inclusion in the

President's List by the parliament under

article

3412 did not mean that they were as

uniform and internally homogeneous unit

incapable of further

subclassification the court agreed that

apprehensions of polit potential

political tinkering by parties in power

in states to expand vote Banks cannot

obviate the Constitutional need for

acknowledging and remedying Inter

inequality among shedu casts now in all

of this they also said that states have

to produce empirical data to support

their claim that a subass required more

benefit ual treatment again a state was

not entitled to reserve 100% of the

seats available for schu cast in favor

of a group to the exclusion of all other

casts in the President's List the

majority judgment basically on Thursday

overruled a 2005 verdict in the E chin

case which had held that

subclassification amounted to tinkering

with the presidential list by the state

legislature and was therefore violative

of article 3412 which exclusively rests

with Parliament now uh all of this is

the Judgment judgment is pretty clear

seven judges one uh out of which six

were in favor one was not uh said that

subcategorization have to have has to

happen out of these seven again or out

of the six who agreed four said there

has to be a creamy layer the other two

were silent so there seems to be a

definite Direction uh different Pope to

the government uh in this verdict but

what will be the political impact

of this verdict well political reactions

were slow to erupt at the time of um

recording this video the prakash edar

LED van B bahujan aari in Maharashtra

had decribed the verdict while Chief

Ministers of Congress ruled Karnataka

and Telangana and TDP LED Andra Pradesh

welcomed it nationally neither the

Congress nor the BJP had put forward a

considered reaction again this is Friday

afternoon that I recording this video so

please give me that benefit of Doubt

later if they do later in the week if

they do come out with a considered

reaction please don't hold me

accountable for that while salami

slicing off backward communities from a

monolith has been seen as one way of

breaking the Monopoly over the political

support of these communities from an

umbrella Alliance to aggregating these

individual communities the verdict of

the Supreme Court on scheduled casts

does not translate easily into black and

white now why do I say that now while in

uttar Pradesh and other states the BJP

has paired the non yadav OBS from the

yadov community to weaken the samajwadi

party's support base in the past of an

umbrella sort of OBC plus Muslim

combination the only instance where the

BJP has advocated the subcategorization

of an sc Community within the category

is the Miga community in Telangana in

2023 before the assembly polls in

Telangana prime minister nendra Modi had

announced that he supported the

subcategorization demand of the Mika

community and later announced the

setting up of a Central Committee to go

into the issue that is still happening

that is still kind of you know playing

out now while the Apex courts verdict uh

before the with the Apex Court verdict

uh the power that used to rest with the

central government the center has to

decide whether a particular

subcategorization can take place is

within the scheduled cast category which

is there in the President's List the SC

vertic very clearly says state

governments now can uh go ahead and do

this

subcategorization and political parties

will it is likely move forward on their

electoral plants for example Karnataka

chief minister sidara has already

announced that his government will do

its best to consider the recommendations

of the Justice sadashiva Commission that

had been set up in 2005 to look at

internal reservations in fact it found a

place in the congress's manifesto in the

State Assembly elections and basically

this commission had said that there is

Big scope for quota within quota in the

SE category of casts SE casts in kataa

what is more problematic for political

parties is the creamy layer concept see

subcategorization you can still think

about okay let me consider say the MGA

community and let me kind of go ahead um

because my government has given this

subcategorization at least I get their

support the rest are not supporting me

or they still will support me or

whatever you can kind of play around

with that but what is problematic for

the political parties largely and in

terms of ideologically as well is the

creamy layer concept it was still now

only uh applicable in the OBC category

and the subject of much opposition even

there now OBC communities have been

socially and educationally backward but

many of them are also say dominant

communities uh some have land Holdings

Etc which is not the same level of

deprivation that schedule cast

communities have traditionally faced so

if you apply the crey layer thing to uh

schedule cast uh categories you'll have

to kind of uh this is a bit of a leap

for political parties to make

reservations uh opponents of the creamy

layer concept say aims to address social

and educational backwardness and not

economic but the SC verdict as I said

before has now created a politically

problematic situation for political

parties since the Paul is now in the

government's Court to take this further

the Supreme Court's verdict will have a

big impact uh on politics quite like the

way the mundle commission report did or

bjp's mle 2.0 of non Yad politics being

separated from the large OBC umbrella it

is however an administratively tricky

issue to pull off and will require much

political Authority and

dexterity something which every

political party which is at the head of

a government will have to think about do

they want to expend their political

Authority on a subject where nobody wins

uh we will revisit this topic once the

needle on this moves again for this week

however this is all I have thank you so

much for watching I shall see you next

week