The Central government presented its case before the Supreme Court on Wednesday, supporting the sub-classification of Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) within the reserved quota system. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that this “furthers the actual purpose behind reservations,” which is to address “hundreds of years of discrimination” faced by these communities.
A seven-judge Constitution bench, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, is reviewing the validity of its 2004 ruling, which had stated that states lacked the authority to further sub-categorize SCs and STs for quota allocation.
Advancing the arguments, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, opposed the EV Chinniah judgement, which had held that any ‘sub-classification’ of the Scheduled Castes would violate Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution.
The 2004 verdict had stated that only Parliament, and not state legislatures, can exclude castes deemed to be SC from the Presidential List under Article 341 of the Constitution.
The top court is examining questions - whether sub-classification inside the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes categories be permitted like in the case of other backward classes (OBCs) and if the state assemblies are competent to introduce laws empowering the states to undertake this exercise.
The law officer said the 2004 judgement disempowered the state to frame appropriate policy by sub-classifying the zone of reservation appropriately and diminished the constitutional guarantee of equality of opportunity.
“The central government is committed to the declared policy of reservation for backward classes as a measure of affirmative action to bring equality to those who have suffered hundreds of years of discrimination,” he said.
The solicitor general, in his written submissions, referred to various judgements and provided several propositions for the court’s considerations.
“The concept of Equality of opportunities operates at a dual level – between open category and backward classes – and secondly, it has to operate even within the backward classes inter-se.
“This bundling together of SC/STs by E.V. Chinnaiah Vs. State of A.P... which disempowers the State to frame appropriate policy by subclassifying the zone of reservation appropriately, diminishes the constitutional guarantee of equality of opportunity.
“It is stated that the lack of sub-classification perpetuates the zone of inequality within the reserved category and estops the State from framing appropriate policy in this regard,” the Centre said.
The central government said the Constitution permits reservations at the level of higher education, entry-level in the government service sector and promotion in the government services.
“It may also be noted that the reservation benefits available are limited in nature. The State can only provide for a limited number of seats in government higher education institutions and posts in the government services which are reserved. The said seats and the posts are even otherwise a scare commodity and therefore required to be re-distributed rationally,” it said.
In order to achieve the actual objective behind reservations, the rationalisation is key and proliferation and deepening of the reservation benefits are necessary, it said.