New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday expressed deep concern over the continuous extension of reservation benefits to children of economically and educationally advanced families in the backward classes. “Families that have achieved a high status or social progress in the society through reservation should eventually come out of the reservation system. Only then will the deserving get justice,” the country’s top court orally opined.
Hearing a petition seeking continuation of reservation benefits for the creamy layer of the backward classes, a double bench comprising Justice B.V. Nagaratna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan asked directly, “If both the parents are IAS officers, is there a need for reservation for the children of such high-ranking officers?”
Reservation can never be overcome
During the hearing, Justice B.V. Nagaratna said, “If both the father and mother are IAS officers, it means that both are in government service and are in a very secure and high position in society. Social progress has already been achieved there. Now there are government orders to exclude such rich and influential people from reservation. But, they are coming to court to challenge that exclusion. We should take this point seriously.”
“With educational and economic empowerment, a high status in society automatically comes. Even after that, if their next generation children continue to demand reservation, we will never be able to get out of this reservation system. This is something we should think about and worry about very seriously,” she warned.
What is the difference between EWS and Creamy?
Advocate Shashank Ratnoo, appearing for the petitioner, argued, “Here the persons concerned are not excluded on the basis of their salary, but rather on the basis of the status of their parents. Hence, this issue needs to be examined in more depth. There should be a clear distinction between the Economically Backward Classes (EWS) and the cream of the backward classes,” he urged. He also argued that the cream of the class criteria should be more liberal than the EWS.
Supreme Court issues notice
After hearing lengthy arguments from both sides, the Supreme Court bench issued an urgent notice to all the parties concerned on the petition filed and ordered them to file written responses. The court is now examining the constitutional question of whether the economic and employment status of a person can override caste-based social backwardness.
From the pages of history: Mandal case and the 8 lakh limit
Indra Sawhney verdict (1992): In the historic ‘Mandal case’ verdict, the Supreme Court upheld the 27% reservation for the OBC category, but ordered that the ‘creamy layer’ (wealthy/advanced) people among them should be mandatorily excluded from the quota.
Current rule: Currently, if the annual income of OBC families is more than 8 lakh rupees, they are considered as creamy layer. Regardless of the income limit, those holding high constitutional posts, senior officers (IAS/IPS) or children of high-ranking military officers are automatically excluded from the reservation.
Important verdict of March: The Supreme Court, in its recent important verdict in March, had clarified that the creamy layer should not be determined by keeping only the income of the parents as the criterion, but rather the nature and status of their employment should be considered.