Cauldron of Dalit politics boiling after Supreme Court's judgment

The ruling on sub-classification within SCs and STs has sparked sharp reactions from several political parties and activists alike

The 6:1 Supreme Court verdict on August 1, which ruled that sub-classification within Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) is permissible, has roiled India’s political landscape. While some political leaders and parties have welcomed the decision, others have criticised it, and activist groups among Dalits are preparing to seek a review of the judgment in the apex court.

Academics predict a significant shift in Dalit politics, with new social mobilisations by numerically smaller castes within the SCs against dominant communities, such as Jatavs and Pasis in Uttar Pradesh, Mahars in Maharashtra, Malas in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, and Mazhabi Sikhs and Jatavas in Punjab.

There are concerns that introducing a “creamy layer” within SC and ST quotas might lead to unfilled vacancies due to a lack of suitable candidates, eventually being filled by general category candidates.

At a press conference in Lucknow on Sunday, the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) national president, Mayawati, echoed the dissenting order by Justice Bela M Trivedi, arguing that the verdict contravened Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution. She emphasised that only the President, not states as Supreme Court’s seven-judge bench has ruled, is empowered to classify castes, races, and tribal communities as SCs and STs.

Mayawati said that SCs were a homogeneous group, as reservations were based on untouchability, not educational or economic weakness. The Supreme Court’s August 1 order overruled a 2004 verdict by a five-judge Bench in E V Chinnaiah vs State of Andhra Pradesh, which held that sub-classification was impermissible. The seven-judge Bench, led by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, in its majority order, said SCs were a heterogeneous group.

The BSP urged the top court to reconsider its judgment and called on Dalits to treat the situation as one of “emergency”, and unite against the perceived threat from the Bharatiya Janata Party, the Congress, and the Samajwadi Party to end reservations”. On a question about introducing creamy layer within the SC quotas, Mayawati said only 10 per cent of the SCs are economically strong, and even they continue to suffer social stigma.  

She demanded that the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government amend the Constitution to include Articles 341 and 342 in the Ninth Schedule, protecting them from judicial review.

Earlier, NDA constituents like the Chirag Paswan-led Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas) and Ramdas Athawale-led Republican Party of India (Athawale) also disagreed with the Supreme Court order. However, several prominent political parties, including the BJP, the Congress, the SP, and the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), have been cautious in their responses. Congress chief ministers in southern states, such as Karnataka’s Siddaramaiah, and Telangana’s A Revanth Reddy, and its INDIA bloc ally M K Stalin, president of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and CM of Tamil Nadu, have praised the Supreme Court order and announced plans to implement sub-classification in their respective states soon.

Speaking with Business Standard, Ashok Bharti, chairman of the National Confederation of Dalit Organisations (NACDOR), highlighted potential issues arising from the Supreme Court’s order. He referred to the CJI’s order that any sub-classification must be based on “quantifiable and demonstrable data” instead of political expediency.

Bharti pointed out that only a few castes within the SCs are dominant across states, while others are numerically significant in specific districts but have a minimal statewide presence. For example, in UP, of the 66 SC castes, Jatavs comprise 54 per cent, Pasis 16 per cent, and Koris 12.07 per cent. Dhangars make up 5 per cent, and Balmikis 3.5 per cent.

“The rest have miniscule presence, and they will suffer because of the sub-classification since the quotas on offer for them would be based on their numbers and therefore small,” Bharti said.

Critics of sub-classification argue that some castes, associated with specific jobs, are over-represented even when numerically smaller. Bharti vowed to fight the order “in the Supreme Court and on the streets”.

However, the 2022 Bihar caste census revealed that numerically strong castes could be underrepresented in government jobs, with dominant castes cornering opportunities. Political activist Yogendra Yadav, head of Swaraj India, praised the Supreme Court order, citing caste census data showing educational disparities among castes.

 “For every 10,000 members of the Dhobi community in Bihar, 124 have had access to higher education. The number for Dusadhs is 45. Among Musahars, only one of 10,000 of its members has higher education,” he said.

Badri Narayan, director of the Prayagraj-based G B Pant Social Science Institute, believes the judgment will trigger new political and social mobilisations, as many SC communities have been marginalised. He expects the sub-classification to redistribute democratic and social justice resources.

However, Bharti provided data showing that a significant portion of SC/ST quotas in government jobs remains unfilled annually. Even if dominant castes secure more seats, many positions remain vacant, eventually being filled by general category candidates. According to the 2023 report of the parliamentary standing committee on SC/ST welfare, SCs and STs are over-represented in sanitation jobs but under-represented in Group A jobs. The report found that 37 per cent of safai karmacharis in the central government are SCs, and 7.4 per cent are tribals, while SCs hold 13 per cent of Group A jobs (against their 15 per cent quota) and STs 5.5 per cent.

To and fro

1975: Punjab govt reserves 50% jobs within the Scheduled Caste (SC) quota for Balmikis and Mazhabi Sikhs

2000: Andhra Pradesh govt introduces sub-quotas within the SC quota

2004: A 5-judge Bench of the Supreme Court in E V Chinnaiah vs Andhra Pradesh holds that SCs were a homogeneous group and sub-classification not permissible

2006: Punjab and Haryana High Court strikes down Punjab govt circular against the backdrop of the 2004 judgment

2006: Centre constitutes Justice Usha Mehra Commission to examine sub-categorisation of SCs in Andhra, recommends amending the Constitution

2020: In Davinder Singh and Ors, a 5-judge Supreme Court Bench doubts the correctness of the decision in the E V Chinniah verdict, refers it to a 7-judge Bench

2024: 7-judge Bench verdict allows for sub-classification in the SC quota