Various stakeholders responded to the Supreme Court’s ruling that allows states to create separate quotas for the most disadvantaged groups within Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs). While for some it entailed achieving social justice others had some concerns with the practical implementation of the bill without the caste survey.
On Thursday, the SC resolved to sub-classify SCs and STs, establishing separate quotas for the most backward groups within these categories. The 7-judge bench, by a majority of 6:1, concluded that this sub-classification does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution which states that the state cannot deprive any person of equality before the law.
Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud mentioned that the subclasses will remain in the SC/ST list, highlighting that these groups are very diverse.
Prakash Ambedkar, president of the Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi (VBA) and grandson of B.R. Ambedkar, condemned the SC’s verdict. He argued that the ruling contradicts the intent of the Constitution’s reservation system. Ambedkar stated that any such sub-classification should be handled by Parliament, and warned about the ruling’s potential “adverse implications”, emphasizing that it is “a central subject and not a state issue”.
“The Supreme Court verdict allowing states to do sub-classification of Scheduled Castes is a victory for those sections seeking it. What is missing in it is the process,” he told the Indian Express.
Ambedkar added: “A state is not a competent authority to undertake sub-classification of SCs. If it is necessary, it should be done only by Parliament.” Secondly, he argued, “The premises on which this sub-classification is justified is to ensure fair representation (in quota) to sub-castes within SCs, STs, and OBCs (Other Backward Classes).”
Congress Member of Parliament (MP) Pappu Yadav emphasized that a caste-based census is essential for implementing the decision effectively. “The SC has said the right thing but the question is who will implement it. The RSS? How much of the SC’s verdict has been respected? The talk about a caste census to see who has what and who should get opportunities is very clear. Once the caste census is done, it will become clear who received what and when. This verdict is absolutely correct, and the communities that have not received opportunities should come forward,” Yadav said as quoted by the Press Trust of India (PTI).
Another reaction came from Lok Sabha MP Chandrashekhar Azad. While speaking to the media, he expressed his concerns about implementing the verdict. “Does this not violate Article 341? I also want the deprived classes to benefit but the way the government has privatised and implemented policies, how will the backward castes benefit? They say only those who feel the pain know it. I want to see how many SC/ST judges are on the bench, who the lawyers are, and their intentions. All this should come to light.”
He further added that if the sub-classification starts, the SC should first work towards bringing democracy. “When they (judges) support EWS and then become Rajya Sabha members or commission members, many questions arise. What monitoring has been done on the atrocities committed against SCs and STs? SC/ST people are now aware, and discussions will happen. This cannot be done without caste census. I cannot say anything more without studying the verdict,” Azad said.
Shambhavi Chaudhary of the Lok Janshakti Party (Ramvilas) MP from Samastipur, pointed out the basic idea behind reservations. “The basis of reservation was untouchability. It was meant to uplift those castes that were left behind by giving them reservation. Therefore, the creamy and non-creamy layer cannot apply to SC/ST as the basis is untouchability and social representation,” she said.
Meanwhile, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Brij Lal praised the verdict, saying it helps address economic differences within the SC/ST communities.”I welcome the Supreme Court’s decision because it ensures that those SC/ST families who have generations in government jobs and have become wealthy should not get reservations. Instead, poor laborers and farmers living in villages who are doing manual labor should receive reservations. This is a social issue as well because if someone is deprived of reservation today, the next generation might become poor again. Therefore, I welcome the SC’s judgment,” he said, accusing Congress and Samajwadi Party (SP), of historically failing Dalit communities.
Congress MP Sukhdev Bhagat stressed the need for proper representation in reservations, supporting the Supreme Court’s interpretation. “The SC is the highest interpreter of the Constitution and reservation is about representation. These things should come to light,” he remarked.
Manda Krishna Madiga, leader of the Madiga Reservations Porata Samithi (MRPS), also praised the Supreme Court’s decision to categorize SCs into A, B, C, and D groups.
Reacting to the verdict in New Delhi, Manda Krishna mentioned that their effort to achieve this decision had taken 30 years.
“Many people have lost their lives for this just cause. But we fought against all odds and finally emerged victorious,” he said, expressing gratitude to the judges for their decision.
He thanked Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Home Minister Amit Shah, and Union Minister G. Kishan Reddy for their support. Manda Krishna also expressed gratitude to all political parties and their leaders for backing the movement. He appreciated Chief Minister A. Revanth Reddy for appointing a government advocate in favour of sub-categorization. Manda Krishna noted that the ruling provides 11% reservations for Madigas in Telangana and 7% in Andhra Pradesh, and urged for immediate quota inclusion in job notifications. He also stressed the need for reservations in educational institutions as per the new ruling.
