The creamy layer of social justice

The creamy layer of social justice

Article:

1. Shyam Babu has talked about public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Samta Andolan Samiti that seeks the removal of creamy layer among the SC/STs in job reservations.

Important Analysis:

2. SC in Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta, held that the government need not collect quantifiable data belonging to the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (SC/STs) to provide reservations for them in promotions that was stipulated by its 2006 verdict in Nagaraj v. Union of India (2006).
3. In Nagaraj case, court had ignored the ruling of Indra Sawhney case, 1992 that any discussion on creamy layer “has no relevance” in the context of SC/STs.
4. However, in its current ruling, the court was silent about the core issue whether the ‘creamy layer’ among SC/STs should be barred from obtaining promotions through reservations.
5. Argument in favor of removal of Creamy Layer among SC/ST in Job reservation:

• The rationale behind the demand to prohibit elite or privileged sections from accessing quota posts is that these sections are as well qualified as general candidates.
• Theoretically, SC/STs who belongs to creamy layer would eventually end up garnering more posts than their proportion in population.

6. SC judgement leading to debate, whether the ‘creamy layer’ among SC/STs should be barred or not:

 In Indra Sawhney case,1992: Any discussion on creamy layer “has no relevance” in the context of SC/STs

• Verdict in Indra Sawhney makes it clear that the SC/STs are given job reservations not because they are poor but because they are excluded.
• Article 335:Job reservations for SC/STs is as a right of representation, not as a welfare measure. However, Article 335 also states that the acknowledgement of claims of the SCs/STs while ‘making appointments to posts and services shall be consistent with the concerns of efficiency’. Hence, application of creamy layer criteria for SC/STs will defeat this second requirement.
• But such logic can also be applicable for employees in the open category.

7. Nagaraj v. Union of India, 2006: collect quantifiable data to provide reservation.

  In Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta 2018: The court has taken more than a decade to correct an anomaly in the Nagaraj case which had added in a creamy layer filter for promotions for SC/ST employees.

8. As per the litigation, the court could have addressed an often ignored aspect of the matter — the right of the creamy layer among the community to opt out of reservations.

9. As citizens, we expect two certainties from any verdict on public policy by a constitution bench of the Supreme Court.

• It must hold whether the underlying principle(s) is/are consistent with the Constitution of India.
• Such a verdict must end governance paralysis.

10. Unfortunately, the court has accomplished neither objective.