Subclassification of SCs: A Progressive Step Towards Substantive Equality
Context
The recent Supreme Court judgment, which allows States to classify Scheduled Castes (SC) into groups and give preferential treatment to the weaker and more backward among them, marks a significant step in this progression.
- By a majority of 6:1, the Court has rejected the notion that SCs constitute a single homogeneous class, thus overturning a 2005 Constitution Bench judgment (E.V. Chinnaiah vs AP) that had declared such classifications unconstitutional.
Relevance:
GS-02 (Indian polity)
Dimensions of the Article:
- What is the Issue?
- Need to Address This Issue
- What is Subclassification under SCs?
- Concerns
- Advantages
What is the Issue?
- The primary issue at hand is the recognition and accommodation of the varying degrees of backwardness within the Scheduled Castes.
- The recent Supreme Court verdict acknowledges that SCs are not a homogeneous class.
- Under the Presidential List, they share a common constitutional status, but significant differences exist in their levels of advancement.
- Historical and empirical evidence supports this differentiation, as not all SC communities have benefited equally from affirmative action policies.
Need to Address This Issue
- Addressing this issue is crucial for achieving substantive equality. The idea of treating all SCs as a single class overlooks the diverse levels of backwardness and the varying socio-economic conditions within these communities.
- By recognizing these differences, the State can provide more targeted and effective affirmative action, ensuring that the most disadvantaged groups within the SC category receive the support they need.
What is Subclassification under SCs?
- The Supreme Court’s judgment allows States to further classify SCs into sub-groups and extend preferential treatment to the weaker sections among them. This subclassification aims to ensure that the benefits of affirmative action reach those who are most in need.
- It is based on the understanding that while all SCs share a history of untouchability, the extent of their social and economic backwardness varies significantly.
- This approach aligns with the principle that the weakest should receive the benefits of affirmative action and not be overshadowed by those who are relatively more advanced.
Concerns
- Implementation Challenges: Applying the ‘creamy layer’ concept, traditionally used for Other Backward Classes (OBCs), to SCs may pose challenges. The norms for determining the creamy layer among SCs cannot be identical to those for OBCs, as the socio-economic conditions differ.
- Uniformity and Fairness: There are concerns about maintaining uniformity and fairness in the implementation of this subclassification. Ensuring that the criteria for identifying the most backward sections are applied consistently across different States is crucial to avoid disparities.
Advantages
- Targeted Affirmative Action: Subclassification allows for more targeted affirmative action policies, ensuring that the benefits reach the most disadvantaged groups within the SC category. This approach can lead to more effective and meaningful social justice.
- Enhanced Representation: By focusing on the weaker sections within SCs, subclassification can enhance the representation of these groups in education, employment, and other areas, helping to bridge the gap between the more and less advanced sections.
- Promotion of Substantive Equality: This judgment reinforces the concept of substantive equality, moving beyond formal equality to address the actual socio-economic conditions and historical disadvantages faced by different groups within the SC category.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s judgment allowing States to classify SCs into sub-groups and provide preferential treatment to the weaker sections marks a significant step towards achieving substantive equality. By recognizing the diverse levels of backwardness within the SC category, this approach can lead to more targeted and effective affirmative action policies. However, it is essential to address the implementation challenges and ensure consistency and fairness in the application of subclassification. With the right steps, this judgment can deepen social justice and enhance the representation of the most disadvantaged groups within the SC category.
