Five must-reads on the sub-classification decision

Last week, a seven-judge Constitution Bench upheld state governments’ power to create sub-classification within the reserved categories for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. In a 6:1 majority, the bench reasoned that the ‘quota within quota’ was justified because of the varying levels of discrimination and backwardness experienced by different groups in the Presidential List. Justice Bela Trivedi, in dissent, held that sub-classification would amount to a tinkering of the List, which is a homogenous group for the purpose of affirmative action policies.

During the hearings, it was clear that the Court was leaning towards sub-classification being the next logical step to tackle what Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud termed a “battle of backwardness within backwardness”. However, the bench had cautioned that there must be tailor-made parameters guiding the exercise of sub-classification. 

The Chief’s majority opinion prescribes broad yardsticks for sub-classification—(1) must be based on an intelligible differentia and have a rational nexus to the legislation; (2) that it cannot lead to the exclusion of certain castes in the Presidential List from the benefit of reservation, and (3) that it must be based on empirical data that proves the need for sub-classification and social emancipation. The bench also made it clear that any legislation creating sub-classification would be subject to judicial review. 

But does this solve the problem? In the wake of the judgement, there’s been a wide spectrum of opinions and reactions from political parties, social groups, journalists, academics and public figures. We’ve curated a list of five articles from the Indian news media that will give you a sense of the stakes involved. 

Sharp divide opens up on Supreme Court’s verdict on sub-classification of SCs and STs

Abhik Deb and Nolina Minj of Scroll capture reactions from politicians, Dalit and Adivasi leaders and academics. The article highlights the divergent reactions of political parties and interest groups, while making clear that the decision has been largely welcomed by those Dalit and Adivasi communities that “believe they have lagged behind other, more dominant groups.” It also highlighted stakeholders’ concern about the ambiguity over the criteria on which sub-classification can be based. 

Why a post-doc is cleaning septic tanks in Tamil Nadu

In this compelling human interest story in The Indian Express, Nikhila Henry profiles Ravichandran Bathran aka Muhammad, a post-doctorate who now runs a septic tank cleaning company in Kotagiri, Tamil Nadu. A paper on caste authored by Muhammed, who is from the Arunthathiyar community, was cited in a footnote in the Chief Justice’s majority opinion. (A Tamil Nadu legislation providing ‘quota within quota’ to the Arunthathiyar community, one of the most backward in the state, had been challenged in the Supreme Court.)

Muhammad’s story exemplifies why people from more backward castes are hopeful that the Court’s decision to uphold sub-classification will bring to light the “inter-caste atrocities among Dalits.”

Supreme Court verdict on caste sub-classification is a landmark and benchmark

In an opinion piece for the Express, activist Yogendra Yadav and researcher Prannv Dhawan argue that the Court’s decision “demonstrated sensitivity towards the most disadvantaged sections within the Scheduled Castes and charts the course for resolving their historic grievances.” The authors briefly trace the muddled history of the case and the previous decisions on the subject. 

While acknowledging that the ‘creamy layer’ issue was not referred to the bench, they approvingly cite Justice Gavai’s example of the absurdity of like treatment for the child of a bureaucrat and a manual labourer. 

They say that readings of the judgement as a “dilution of the affirmative action regime” and as aiding the “current regime’s designs to divide Dalits” ignore the “ground realities” of inter se discrimination in Scheduled Castes and don’t account for the resentment that has built up. 

Subclassification of Scheduled Castes: Policymakers face the challenge of addressing inequality without fracturing unity

For Frontline magazine, V. Venkatesan summarises the key findings of the majority opinion. In the opening third of the piece, he quotes extensively from A Crusade For Social Justice: Bending Governance towards the Deprived, a 2018 book by P.S. Krishnan, a civil servant turned social justice activist. 

Krishnan’s work details how variations among Dalit sub-groups had come about. In the context of Andhra Pradesh, for instance, a coastal community like the Mala were better-placed to make the most of affirmative action policies than an interior-based community like the Madiga. He also highlights how castes that are associated with occupations such as manual scavenging have faced greater disadvantages. These gaps have created “strains between Dalit castes” and Krishan warns against employing measures that will “widen the fissures and misunderstanding between them”. 

This is the context Venkatesan sets before highlighting the salient points of the sub-classification judgement. By doing so, he seems to suggest that even as the judgement aims to level the playing field, it runs the risk of creating further divisions within an already-strained group. 

SC/ST Sub-classification: Does Judicial Analysis Capture Social Backwardness?

In The Quint, Subhajit Naskar analyses the judgement and engages with the arguments of the counsel during the hearings. He breaks down individual judges’ observations on backwardness and infers their implications. 

For instance, commenting on Justice Gavai’s observations to extend the ‘creamy layer’ exclusion to SC/ST groups, Naskar argues that it “fails the empirical test as caste-based discrimination against Dalits becomes more nuanced at higher positions.”

He also contends that it would be unfair to put the onus on economically forward SC/ST communities to reduce the disparity between themselves and more backward groups. “The wealth gaps created by the upper castes’ capital ownership,” he argues, should not “further divide the small capital shares of SC/STs.” 

Pointing to the existing vacant seats in faculty recruitment, Naskar also warns against sub-classification negatively affecting the entry of SC/STs into the higher education sector.