Exploring Dr. Ambedkar's Influence On Justice Gavai's Judgment In Caste Sub-Classification Case

In his judgment allowing sub-classification within Scheduled Castes (SCs), Justice BR Gavai of the Supreme Court drew extensively on the views of Dr. BR Ambedkar to address concerns and validate the decision. The judgment extensively references Ambedkar's thoughts on social justice, equality, and the upliftment of disadvantaged groups, using them as a foundation to support the permissibility of sub-classification within SCs. The judgment begins by quoting Ambedkar's warning from his Constituent Assembly speech on November 25, 1949, that political democracy alone is insufficient and must be accompanied by social democracy, which upholds liberty, equality, and fraternity as core principles. “He pointed out the contradictions in the country about the social and economic structure. He warned that if we continue to deny equality in social and economic life for long, we will do so only by putting our political democracy in peril. He therefore appealed to the nation to remove this contradiction at the earliest possible moment. He warned that if we do not do so, those who suffer from inequality will blow up the structure of political democracy which the Constituent Assembly had so laboriously built up”, Justice Gavai highlighted. Justice Gavai relied on various speeches and works of Ambedkar, emphasizing Ambedkar's belief that the removal of untouchability was a crucial aspect of nation-building and fraternity. “Dr. Ambedkar was of the view that if untouchables come out of that stigma and participate in nation-building, they will only contribute to the progress of the nation. He was of the view that the movement for removal of untouchability is in true sense a movement for nation-building and fraternity,” Justice Gavai highlighted. Historical context and Ambedkar's activism Justice Gavai noted that at one stage, caste discrimination had surpassed even racial discrimination and slave trade globally. He recounted how certain castes were subjected to inhuman treatment by upper classes, denied basic rights, and forced into degrading conditions. Justice Gavai referenced Ambedkar's 1919 testimony before the Southborough Committee, which exposed systematic exclusion of untouchables from employment and public services. This testimony included examples of discrimination such as refusal to buy from untouchable traders and exclusion from military and police services. Ambedkar's activism, including the Mahad Satyagraha of 1927 and the Kalaram Temple Satyagraha, is cited to illustrate his relentless efforts to secure equal rights for the marginalized. Ambedkar's views on equality and reservation The judgment underscored Ambedkar's belief that the struggle against untouchability was fundamentally a struggle for equality. Ambedkar argued that public property and resources should not be monopolized by upper castes and that untouchables had an inherent right to access them. Justice Gavai referred to Anurag Bhaskar's book “The Foresighted Ambedkar,” which highlighted that Ambedkar dismissed the notion that untouchables should wait for upper castes to willingly grant them rights, instead calling for active efforts to secure these rights through legal and social reforms. Justice Gavai referred to Ambedkar's speeches during the drafting of the Constitution, particularly his views on Article 16, which guarantees equality of opportunity in public employment. Ambedkar acknowledged the need for reservations to ensure representation of historically marginalized communities but emphasized that such reservations should not undermine the principle of equality, Justice Gavai noted. “Dr. Ambedkar states that the equality of opportunity as specified in clause (1) has to be reconciled with the demand made by certain communities. He states that on account of historical reasons, the administration has been controlled by one community or a few communities, that such a situation should disappear and that the others also must have an opportunity of getting into the public services. However, he states that if the demand of such communities, in full, is accepted, it will destroy the first principle of equality guaranteed in clause (1)…He therefore advocates for confinement of reservation to a minority of seats”, Justice Gavai added, referring to Dr. Ambedkar's speech on November 30, 1948 on Article 16. Justice Gavai highlighted that the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the State must resort to compensatory action for the purpose of making people who are factually unequal in their wealth, education or social environment, equal in specified areas. Disparity in reservation benefits among SCs Justice Gavai cited the Justice Usha Mehra Commission Report, which revealed that despite a Presidential List comprising 60 Scheduled Castes, only 4 or 5 communities had availed of reservation benefits in Andhra Pradesh. In Punjab, the Balmikis and Mazhabi...

Exploring Dr. Ambedkar's Influence On Justice Gavai's Judgment In Caste Sub-Classification Case

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags