The creamy layer of social justice
Article:
- Shyam Babu has talked about public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Samta Andolan Samiti that seeks the removal of creamy layer among the SC/STs in job reservations.
Important Analysis:
- SC in Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta, held that the government need not collect quantifiable data belonging to the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (SC/STs) to provide reservations for them in promotions that was stipulated by its 2006 verdict in Nagaraj v. Union of India (2006).
- In Nagaraj case, court had ignored the ruling of Indra Sawhney case, 1992 that any discussion on creamy layer “has no relevance” in the context of SC/STs.
- However, in its current ruling, the court was silent about the core issue whether the ‘creamy layer’ among SC/STs should be barred from obtaining promotions through reservations.
- Argument in favor of removal of Creamy Layer among SC/ST in Job reservation:
- The rationale behind the demand to prohibit elite or privileged sections from accessing quota posts is that these sections are as well qualified as general candidates.
- Theoretically, SC/STs who belongs to creamy layer would eventually end up garnering more posts than their proportion in population.
- SC judgement leading to debate, whether the ‘creamy layer’ among SC/STs should be barred or not:
In Indra Sawhney case,1992: Any discussion on creamy layer “has no relevance” in the context of SC/STs
- Verdict in Indra Sawhney makes it clear that the SC/STs are given job reservations not because they are poor but because they are excluded.
- Article 335:Job reservations for SC/STs is as a right of representation, not as a welfare measure. However, Article 335 also states that the acknowledgement of claims of the SCs/STs while ‘making appointments to posts and services shall be consistent with the concerns of efficiency’. Hence, application of creamy layer criteria for SC/STs will defeat this second requirement.
- But such logic can also be applicable for employees in the open category.
7. Nagaraj v. Union of India, 2006: collect quantifiable data to provide reservation.
In Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta 2018: The court has taken more than a decade to correct an anomaly in the Nagaraj case which had added in a creamy layer filter for promotions for SC/ST employees.
8. As per the litigation, the court could have addressed an often ignored aspect of the matter — the right of the creamy layer among the community to opt out of reservations.
9. As citizens, we expect two certainties from any verdict on public policy by a constitution bench of the Supreme Court.
- It must hold whether the underlying principle(s) is/are consistent with the Constitution of India.
- Such a verdict must end governance paralysis.
10. Unfortunately, the court has accomplished neither objective.