Supreme Court's Ruling on Sub-Categorisation within Scheduled Castes

Introduction and Background

- Recently, a 6:1 landmark verdict by the Supreme Court of India paved the way for sub-categorisation within Scheduled Castes in reservations, thereby widening the scope of protection for underrepresented groups.

- This historic development comes against the backdrop of the Court's 2004 decision that posited the disregard of sub-classification among Scheduled Castes for reservation, claiming it would violate the equality rights. Back then, the court insisted that the Scheduled Caste list should be approached as a uniform, unsegmented group.

- In recent years, states like Punjab, Bihar, and Tamil Nadu have attempted to integrate reservation laws at the State level, aiming to sub-classify Scheduled Castes.

Historical Antecedents 

- The roots of the case date back to 1975, when the Punjab government created a two-tier division in its Scheduled Castes reservation. This action intended to provide a safety net for the Balmiki and Mazhabi Sikh communities, which were economically and educationally backward. 

- A legal dispute arose when a somewhat similar law manifested by Andhra Pradesh in 2000 was abolished by a five-judge Constitution Bench in 2004.

Debating the Legality of Sub-Categorisation

- In E. V. Chinnaiah v State of Andhra Pradesh (2004), the judgement stated that all communities listed under Scheduled Castes in the Presidential List, as per Article 341 of the Constitution, constitute a broad class for reservations.

- Further, the State was deemed not empowered enough to produce sub-classifications within this broad class, arguing that such an action contradicted the Right to Equality.

- Presently, all plans revolve around the Supreme Court as it organises its larger Constitution Bench to decide the matter.

Examining Previous Committees and Commissions for Sub-categorisation

- Committees for Sub-categorisation include the Committee of Secretaries, which comprises five members from various ministries and is chaired by the Cabinet Secretary.

- Past Commissions that have deliberated the issue include the Justice P. Ramachandra Raju Commission (1996) and the National Commission (2007).

Revisiting the 2004 Judgement

- The present court is revisiting the EV Chinnaiah vs. State of Andhra Pradesh case (2004), which claimed Scheduled Castes form a uniform group, thereby making no room for a sub-division amongst them.

- The need to modify this ruling is presently being scrutinised.

Significance and Implications of Recent Judgements

- The introduction of sub-categorisation within Scheduled Castes promises to address the widespread inequalities among SC communities, providing opportunities to those with lesser access to basic facilities.

- This change also aims at ensuring equitable distribution of benefits to all castes within the Scheduled Castes category and recognising the diversity that exists within the SC community.

Anticipated Challenges 

- Legal challenges stem from the fact that the State lacks the power to independently sub-categorise communities listed under Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes.

- Practical challenges arise from outdated socio-economic and population data of Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, and OBC categories.

- The issue of untouchability, from which the Scheduled Castes have historically suffered, calls for the present approach of special treatment to be reassessed.