Centre opposes pleas for income-based creamy layer in SC/ST quotas
Union government argues that judicial precedent has laid down creamy layer concept does not apply to SCs and STs; the majority of welfare schemes, except quota for education and State services, already have a means test ensuring ‘benefits of schemes percolate to those who actually deserve them’
The Union government has argued that the principles of the "cream layer" do not apply to Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) in India. This stance comes in response to petitions seeking an income-based creamy layer within the reserved categories of SCs, STs, and Other Backward Classes (OBCs), similar to the one in place for OBCs.
The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment has maintained that the current welfare and development schemes for SCs, STs, and OBCs already include a means test to ensure benefits reach those who genuinely need them. The government also stated that a modification of the reservation policy, particularly introducing income-based preferences within reserved categories, should be preceded by a thorough review and empirical study of socio-economic data of reserved category beneficiaries.
The Centre emphasized that the 2024 Supreme Court decision allowing sub-categorisation among SCs and STs does not require an Action Taken Report, which has been missing. The government further stated that seeking an income-based creamy layer for SCs/STs does not raise a constitutional issue or violate any fundamental rights under the Constitution.
The Social Justice Ministry accused the petitioners of misstating facts to mislead the court, citing specific judgments that appeared to be a "general observation" regarding OBC reservations. While the 2024 judgment by a seven-judge Bench allowed States to continue sub-categorising SCs and STs, the Centre has been unclear about its stance on using this power at the national level.
The Centre stressed that only Parliament can add or remove communities from the SC and ST lists, and that this is not a matter for the court to decide.
Written by urgent.news from The Hindu's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
