State Must Show Data On Inadequate Representation Of Castes In Services To Sub-Classify : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court in its recent decision allowing sub-classification of Scheduled Castes(SCs), held that the States are required to base their justification of sub-classification on effective and qualitative data indicating 'inadequate representation' of the sub-classified backward classes in state services.The 7-judge Constitution Bench, by 6:1 majority, held that 'inadequate representation' of certain SCs across appointments in state services was a key indicator of proving 'backwardness' within the Schedule Caste. The States are required to prove an 'inter se' backwardness within the SCs in order to make reservations for a specific sub-classified group within the SCs. The judgment was delivered by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices BR Gavai, Vikram Nath, Bela Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra and Satish Chandra Sharma. Six judges upheld sub-classification, with Justice Trivedi dissenting.The Court examined two key issues on the extent of justification required to be given by the States in making sub-classifications within a caste for a reservation : (1) should the state prove 'inter se backwardness' as opposed to the decision in Indra Sawhney v, Union of India which held such backwardness is not required to be 'proven' for SC/STs; (2) Whether it is necessary to prove the 'inadequacy of representation of the more backward with the Scheduled Castes? The Court held that while the decision in Indra Sawhney decision allows the State to give benefits to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes without proving they're backward, the decision makes no express exception for the States to sub-classify without giving a reasonable justification."The decision in Indra Sawhney (supra) exempts the State from having to prove that the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes are backward for the purposes of securing benefits under Articles 15 and 16. The observations do not exempt the State from having to justify the decision of sub-classifying within the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of reservation."It further held that sub-classification is premised on the notion that there exists a hierarchy within the scheduled castes, where certain castes or groups have even more backwardness than the other. Thus it was made clear that while the State doesn't need data to prove the entire class is backward, it must collect data to show differences in backwardness within the class if it wants to sub-classify. Such quantifiable data was necessary to establish the variance in backwardness with the backward classes or 'inter se' backwardness."The basis of sub-classification is that few of the castes or groups within the class are more backward. Thus, though the State is not required to collect quantifiable data to prove backwardness of the entire class of the Scheduled Castes/Tribes, it is required to collect data to prove inter-se backwardness within the class, where it seeks to make a sub-classification within the class." It may be noted that the 9-judge bench in Indra Sawhney (1992) held that the requirement to prove social and educational backwardness for a class to be considered under 'Other Backward Classes' (OBCs) cannot be applied for SCs/STs as they admittedly fall under the category of backward class of citizens as mentioned in the Constitution. However, the decision of a 5-judge bench in M. Nagaraj & Others vs Union Of India (2006) held a contrary observation. In the case relating to reservations for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in promotions, the Court held that the State doesn't need to make reservations for SC/ST in matters of promotions. However, it had added that if the State did wish to exercise its discretion, it is supposed to gather quantifiable data showing the class's backwardness and inadequacy of that class's representation in public employment, in addition to compliance with the requirement of maintaining administrative efficiency as per Article 335.Subsequently, another 5-judge bench in the case of Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta (2018) invalidated the above conclusion in M Nagaraj. It opined that this was contrary to the finding arrived at by the nine-judge bench in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India.It noted that the bench in Indra Sawhney had categorically ruled, “[t]he test or requirement of social and educational backwardness cannot be applied to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, who indubitably fall within the expression “backward class of citizens.”State Must Use Effective, Not Just Quantitative Data To Identify Inadequate Representation; Decision In Nagaraj Wrongly Infers The Observations In RK Sabarwal: Court Clarifies The judgment authored by CJI DY Chandrachud (for himself and Justice Misra) also clarified that states must use 'effective data' and not just quantitative data to identify inadequate representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in government posts.The Court expressly held that to justify...

State Must Show Data On Inadequate Representation Of Castes In Services To Sub-Classify : Supreme Court

Anmol Kaur Bawa

Cadre can't be used as a unit to determine representation, the Court stated.

Tags