The categorisation of Scheduled Caste (SC) communities into three groups in Telangana will come into effect on Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s birth anniversary is on 14 April,2025.
Basis of Categorisation
- Backwardness-Based Division: Sub-categorisation was based on levels of backwardness among SC groups.
- Recommendations by Commission:
- The decision was guided by the Justice Shameem Akhter Commission (a one-man commission).
- The Commission conducted a detailed study and received over 8,600 representations from various stakeholders.
- Formation of Groups
| Group |
Description |
Number of Sub-castes |
% of SC Population |
Reservation Allocated |
| Group 1 |
Most backward among SCs |
15 |
3.288% |
1% |
| Group 2 |
Marginally benefitted SCs |
18 |
62.74% |
9% |
| Group 3 |
Relatively forward among SCs |
26 |
33.96% |
5% |
Scheduled Caste
- Definition: Scheduled Castes (SCs) are communities that are historically disadvantaged and were subjected to untouchability and social discrimination.
- Constitutional Basis: Under Article 341(1), the President of India specifies the castes deemed as Scheduled Castes for each State and Union Territory.
- Parliamentary Power: Article 341(2) empowers Parliament to include or exclude castes from the SC list through legislation.
|
About Subclassification
- Subclassifications refer to dividing a broader reserved category, like Scheduled Castes (SCs), into smaller groups based on their varying levels of social and economic backwardness to ensure fair distribution of benefits.
- Need for Subclassification: Subclassification is necessary because benefits of reservation often disproportionately reach relatively advanced sub-castes, leaving the most marginalized among SCs still deprived.
- For example among Other Backward Classes (OBCs), individuals earning above a certain income threshold are termed as “Creamy Layer” and are excluded from reservation, ensuring that benefits reach the truly disadvantaged “Non-Creamy Layer.”
| Arguments in Favour |
Arguments Against |
| Equitable Distribution: Ensures that the most marginalized within SCs benefit from reservations, not just the relatively advanced groups. |
Fragmentation Risk: May divide the Scheduled Castes, weakening their collective political and social strength. |
| Promotes Substantive Equality: Moves beyond formal equality to achieve real social justice based on actual needs. |
Deviation from Homogeneity Principle: Scheduled Castes were recognized as a homogenous group under Article 341; subclassification could undermine this basis. |
| Addresses Historical Injustice: Recognizes layered discrimination and ensures targeted affirmative action for the most disadvantaged. |
Administrative Complexity: Adds complexity in identifying sub-groups, collecting reliable data, and monitoring implementation. |
| Judicial Endorsement: Recent Supreme Court decisions (2024-25) allow subclassification if data-driven and justified. |
Potential for Political Misuse: Subclassification might be influenced by political pressures rather than genuine social backwardness. |
| Learning from OBC Model: The “creamy layer” concept among OBCs has helped reservations reach the truly needy. |
Legal Uncertainty: Continuous litigation and lack of clear criteria could delay or derail the process. |
| Dynamic Response to Change: Allows updating the reservation policy based on evolving socio-economic realities within SCs. |
Fear of Reduced Benefits: Some sub-castes may fear losing access to benefits they currently enjoy. |
Supreme Court Decision on Sub-Classification of Scheduled Castes
- E.V. Chinnaiah Case (2005): Held that SCs under Article 341 formed a homogenous group and could not be sub-categorised.
- Davinder Singh Case (2014): Referred the issue for reconsideration to a 5-judge Constitution Bench.
- Supreme Court 2020 Ruling: A 5-judge Bench found that the E.V. Chinnaiah judgment requires reconsideration.
- 7-Judge Constitution Bench (2024-25):
- Affirmed that sub-classification of SCs is permissible to achieve substantive equality.
- State’s Power: States can sub-classify SCs based on inadequate representation due to social and educational backwardness.
- Judicial Review: Any categorisation must be data-driven and is subject to judicial scrutiny.
- Creamy Layer: Four judges suggested applying a “creamy layer” principle to SCs, though no binding direction was issued.
Constitutional Provisions Related to SCs and Reservations
- Article 14: Guarantees equality before the law.
- Article 15(4): Permits special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes, including SCs.
- Article 16(1): Ensures equal opportunity in public employment.
- Article 16(4): Allows reservation in public employment for backward classes.
- Article 341(1): Authorises the President to notify Scheduled Castes.
- Article 341(2): Grants Parliament the power to modify the SC list.
- Article 246: Deals with the subject matter of laws made by Parliament and State Legislatures, relevant post-identification of SCs.
Way Forward
- A commission similar to the G. Rohini Commission (for OBC sub-categorisation) could be established.
- The goal must be to address internal disparities among SC groups while preserving community unity and collective strength.
- Policymakers must engage with SC community representatives, legal experts, and social scientists for better understanding of the categorisation.
14 Apr 2025
