Seeking a review of creamy layer reservations (Govt seeks review of some SC decisions)

Excellent study material for all civil services aspirants - begin learning - Kar ke dikhayenge!

 Seeking a review of creamy layer reservations (Govt seeks review of some SC decisions)

---

Read more on - Polity | Economy | Schemes | S&T | Environment

---

• What govt. wants: The GoI requested the Supreme Court to refer to a 7-judge bench a question that "whether the creamy layer concept should apply to SC-STs in promotions, or not". The government wants that exclusion of creamy layer should not happen. (Creamy layer - educationally, socially and economically advanced people)
• Jarnail Singh case, 2018: A five-judge bench in 2018 ruled in the 'Jarnail Singh versus Lachhmi Narayan Gupta case' that creamy layer concept will apply in promotions. The SC agreed with the 2006 M.Nagaraj case verdict that applied creamy layer concept, to ensure that advanced people in SC/STs may not gobble up all benefits. The govt. thinks it will do more harm than good.
• Creamy layer concept: There is a "means-test and creamy layer" in the 1992 'Indra Sawhney versus Union of India' case, by a nine-judge bench.

1. SC upheld the 27% reservations given by government, to Other Backward Classes.
2. SC objected to the creamy layer (advanced people) taking benefit of reservations in promotions etc.
3. It said that economic criterion must be used to check advancement
4. Central govt. to fix norms for income, property, status to identify the creamy layer

• Creamy layer identification: In 1993, the govt. fixed Rs.1 lakh as the ceiling, an then raised it to Rs.8 lakh in 2017 (with multiple intermittent raises).
• Legislation: As the SC held that reservations should apply only in initial appointments not promotions, the Centre then brought a new law in 1995 adding Article 16(4A) [via 77th constitutional amendment]. Reservation in promotions was to continue, as representation of SC/STs in states wasn't adequate.

1. Article 16(4B) was added to carry forward unfilled vacancies in later years and not apply the 50% cap on those
2. Article 355 was amended in 2001 to allow relaxations in qualifying marks and standards, in favour of SC/STs
3. These were challenged in the M.Nagaraj case.

• 2006 M.Nagaraj verdict: The SC laid down three conditions for promotions of SC/STs in public employment –

1. Unless the govt. proves that a particular community is (i) actually backward, (ii) inadequately represented, and (iii) reservations in promotions won't affect administrative efficiency,  no quota in promotion will apply
2. Only quantifiable data should be used.
3. Creamy layer will apply to SC/STs in govt. promotions.

• Jarnail Singh judgment: The 5-judge bench agreed in 2018 with the 2006 judgment that creamy layer principle was based on 'right to equality', and benefits must go to the weakest of the weak.

1. Creamy layer concept will ensure that only deserving members of SC/ST will get reservation benefits
2. It modified the 'quantifiable data needed' part of the 2006 verdict
3. It reiterated that Nagaraj verdict was not wrong in its understanding of the 1992 Indra Sawhney case
4. The Presidential list under Articles 341 or 342 would not be touched (all castes etc. remained intact).

• Summary : The issue of SC/ST promotions in public employment has long been a matter of judicial interpretation, in light of the 1992 creamy layer concept.

Read more on - Polity | Economy | Schemes | S&T | Environment

Join UPSC Self Prep course | Online Course (PT Gurukul)  | Covid Special Course | Join PT courses

* Content sourced from free internet sources (publications, PIB site, international sites, etc.). Take your own subscriptions. Copyrights acknowledged.