'If Both Parents Are IAS Officers, Why Should Children Have Reservation?' : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court today questioned whether children of families that have achieved educational and economic advancement through reservation should continue to avail OBC reservation benefits, observing that such advancement results in social mobility too.“If both parents are IAS officers why should they have reservations? With education and economic empowerment, there is social mobility. So then again to seek reservation for the children, we will never get out of it. That is a matter we have to concern. Also, what is the use then? You are giving reservation. The parents have studied, they are in good jobs, they are getting good income, and the children want reservation again. See, they should get out of reservation”, Justice BV Nagarathna said.A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan made the observations while hearing a petition against a Karnataka High Court judgment upholding exclusion of the petitioner, whose parents are both state government employees, from reservation on the ground of creamy layer.The case concerns a candidate belonging to the Kuruba community, classified under Category II(A) among Karnataka's backward classes, who was selected for appointment as Assistant Engineer (Electrical) in the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited under the reserved category. However, the District Caste and Income Verification Committee denied him a caste validity certificate after concluding that he fell within the creamy layer.The candidate's family income was assessed at about ₹19.48 lakh annually. The authorities noted that both parents were government employees and that their combined income exceeded the prescribed creamy layer threshold.During the hearing, Justice Nagarathna repeatedly expressed concern that reservation benefits were continuing even after families had progressed socially and economically. She remarked that social status improves with economic and educational empowerment. She also questioned the rationale of extending reservation benefits to children whose parents are educated, hold good jobs and earn substantial incomes.She further observed, “There has to be some balance. Socially and educationally backward, yes, but once the parents have attend a level because of taking advantage of reservation, if they are both IAS officers, both are in government service, they are very well placed. Social mobility is there. Now they are questioning the exclusion. This also has to be kept in mind”, she said.The observations came after Advocate Shashank Ratnoo argued that salary income is not the determining criterion for identifying the creamy layer among government servants. He submitted that creamy layer exclusion depends on the status of the parents, such as whether they belong to Group A or Group B services, and not merely on their salary income. If salary were treated as the sole criterion, even drivers, peons, clerks and other lower-ranking government employees could be excluded from reservation benefits, he said.Ratnoo argued that for government servants, salary income was not the determining factor for creamy layer. He submitted that income from salary and agriculture could not be considered, and only income generated through business or other sources could be considered. He submitted that there were divergent judicial views on the issue, and it required a detailed examination.Justice Nagarathna gave an example of children of IAS officers, asking why reservation should continue to be available where both parents are IAS officers and are well placed in government service. She further noted that in this case, the petitioner's father was drawing a basic pay of ₹53,900 per month while the mother was drawing a basic pay of ₹52,650 per month. Ratnoo maintained that these figures were not relevant for determining creamy layer status relying on a Karnataka government clarification stating that where parents were state government employees, salary and allowances should not be considered while assessing eligibility.He submitted that if all forms of income were taken into account while determining creamy layer status, no distinction would remain between OBC reservation and EWS reservation. He argued that the creamy layer standards must remain more liberal.Ultimately, the Court issued notice on the plea.The petition arises from a judgment of a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court which overturned a Single Judge's decision in favour of the candidate. The Single Judge had held that salary income of the candidate's parents was required to be excluded while determining whether he belonged to the creamy layer and had directed issuance of a caste validity certificate.The Division Bench reversed that ruling and held that the Central Government Office Memorandum of September 8, 1993, excluding salary income for determination of creamy layer, applied only to reservations under the Union Government and not to reservations in Karnataka. Referring to Karnataka's creamy layer policy,...

'If Both Parents Are IAS Officers, Why Should Children Have Reservation?' : Supreme Court

Amisha Shrivastava

The Court orally commented that economic empowerment will provide social mobility.

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Amisha Shrivastava

'If Both Parents Are IAS Officers, Why Should Children Have Reservation?' : Supreme Court

Amisha Shrivastava

The Court orally commented that economic empowerment will provide social mobility.

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Amisha Shrivastava

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers