Why in news?
The Supreme Court hears a petition to exclude the well offs among SCs and STs from reservation benefits.
What are the concerns?
- There are concerns that the rich among the SC/STs were benefiting from the reservation policies.
- On the other hand, the intended deserving and impoverished population continue to be excluded.
- There is lack of percolation of benefits to nearly 95% members of these communities at the bottom, defeating the whole purpose.
- This is perpetuating the problem of rich-poor divide.
- It is also becoming a cause of social unrest, especially the Naxalite movements and the perennial problem of poverty.
What is the demand?
- The petition argues that no class or caste remained homogeneously backward across time.
- Only the bottom sections of the caste continue to reel under disadvantageous condition.
- It thus calls for excluding the creamy layer of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes from reservation benefits.
Is it legally valid?
- In 1992, a 9-judge Bench of the Supreme Court in the Indra Sawhney case (or the Mandal case) gave a verdict in this regard.
- It upheld the caste-based reservation for the OBCs as valid.
- The court also said the creamy layer of the OBCs (those earning a specified income) should not get the benefits of reservation.
- However, it applied only to the OBCs and not the SC/STs.
- The current petition refers to a Constitution Bench’s judgment in 2006.
- The judgement made value of assets of an individual claiming reservation as a criteria for deciding the creamy layer.
- It is now for the court to decide on the issue of skewed benefits of measures intended for rooting out social and economic backwardness.
Source: The Hindu
