Use data, reason, don’t split to keep out: How Supreme Court lays down red lines in sub-classification verdict
The ruling states that states cannot micro-classify in a way that it would “denude”, “rather than promote” the guarantee of equality or in a way that replaces the doctrine of equality with the “doctrine of classification.”
Justice Gavai called for bringing in the “creamy layer” framework even for SC/ST quota, despite warning against exclusion with micro-classification. Empirical data, “reasonable” grounds that will be subject to judicial scrutiny, avoiding the perils of “micro-classification” — this is how the Supreme Court, in its verdict allowing sub-classification within Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes quotas, has underlined the principles that will operationalise the new framework. “It is not sufficient if the principle underlying the classification is relevant or shares a nexus to the purpose. The principle underlying the classification must be reasonable and rational,” Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said in the 6-1 ruling.
The framers of the Constitution had limited tinkering with the SC/ST lists, annexed to the Constitution, to ensure that affirmative action is not framed in political terms. The power to change that is restricted only to Parliament and the idea of sub-classification raises concerns of its misuse. Addressing these aspects, the SC ruling has drawn the red line on how states cannot sub-classify the 15% SC quota and 7.5% ST quota.
The Bench of (from left) Justices Manoj Misra, Bela M Trivedi, B R Gavai, CJI D Y Chandrachud, Vikram Nath, Pankaj Mithal and Satish Chandra Sharma.
Share
