[Answered] The debate on sub-classification within Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) has gained prominence, with the Telangana model offering a distinct approach. Critically examine the arguments for and against sub-classification, evaluating its potential to address the uneven distribution of social justice benefits. In light of the Telangana experience, discuss the challenges and opportunities for implementing such a model at the national level, and its implications for the future of social justice in India.

Introduction

The Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) are not homogenous groups; disparities persist within them. The recent Supreme Court verdict (2024) upholding sub-classification has reignited debate. Telangana’s Scheduled Castes (Rationalization of Reservation) Act, 2025—categorizing SCs into three sub-groups—presents a pioneering model to address intra-caste inequities in access to affirmative action.

Arguments For Sub-Classification

1. Equity within Equity: Sub-castes like Madigas in Telangana allege marginalization by dominant groups like Malas. Sub-classification ensures “deepest inclusion” among the oppressed.
2. Targeted Benefit Distribution: Based on empirical data, it prevents monopolization of benefits and ensures horizontal equity.
3. Judicial Backing: In State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh (2020) and the 2024 SC verdict, the Court affirmed states’ power to rationalize SC quotas.
4. Precedents in OBCs: Tamil Nadu and Bihar already use graded reservation models within OBCs, offering policy templates.

Arguments Against Sub-Classification

1. Social Fragmentation: Risks deepening intra-SC and intra-ST divisions, weakening collective political mobilization.
2. Implementation Complexity: Requires robust data, administrative mechanisms, and constant review.
3. Fear of Dilution: Dominant sub-castes fear erosion of hard-won representation.
4. Potential Politicization: May become a tool for electoral appeasement rather than genuine reform.

Telangana Model: Challenges and Opportunities

Opportunities:

• Model for Equity-Driven Reforms: Rational allocation (e.g., 1% to Group I, 9% to Group II) showcases empirical approach.
• Community-Led Demands: Reflects bottom-up policy via long-standing Madiga movement.
• Triggering Federal Innovation: Encourages other states (e.g., Punjab, Andhra Pradesh) to explore similar laws.

Challenges:

• Legal Scrutiny: Subject to judicial review under Articles 14, 15, 16.
• Data Deficit: Absence of robust caste-disaggregated socio-economic data may hinder rollout.
• National Framework Absence: Lack of a uniform policy may lead to inter-state disparities.

Conclusion

Telangana’s graded reservation is a bold step toward “real equality”—ensuring the most marginalized among SCs are not left behind. However, its success hinges on empirical data, sensitive implementation, and national coordination. Sub-classification, if pursued cautiously, can recalibrate India’s affirmative action from mere representation to genuine inclusion, thereby advancing the ideals of Ambedkarite social justice.