Creamy layer debate returns to court: SC/ST reservations and income as proxy for disadvantage
Fresh petitions before the Supreme Court seek to extend the "creamy layer" principle to SC/ST reservations, based on a misreading of the 2024 Davinder Singh judgment. The article, by Prannv Dhawan and Vignesh Karthik K.R., argues that this revives the debate on whether income can serve as a proxy for caste-based disadvantage. The creamy layer principle, introduced in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) for OBCs, initially focused on status, not income. Extending it to SC/STs, as Ambedkar warned, is problematic because economic progress does not erase social burdens. The Davinder Singh judgment authorized sub-classification within SC lists to direct benefits to the most marginalized, which is distinct from creamy layer exclusion.
Key Points
- New petitions seek to apply the "creamy layer" principle to SC/ST reservations, citing the 2024 Davinder Singh judgment.
- The article argues that using income as a proxy for caste-based disadvantage for SC/STs is constitutionally and sociologically indefensible.
- B.R. Ambedkar had warned against excluding wealthy or educated untouchables, stating that economic progress does not remove social discrimination.
- The "creamy layer" principle was established for OBCs in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992), initially based on status (e.g., Class I/II government posts), not solely income.
- The Davinder Singh judgment permitted sub-classification within SC communities to target the most marginalized, which is distinct from creamy layer exclusion.
Exam Facts
- The Supreme Court issued notice on March 10 regarding a PIL by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay.
- The seven-judge bench decision is in State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh (2024).
- The creamy layer principle was introduced in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992).
- B.R. Ambedkar's objection to excluding wealthy untouchables was noted in his 1932 note to the Lothian Committee and at the 1936 Mahar Conference.
- The Rohith Nathan judgment (Union of India v. Rohith Nathan) struck down parental salary alone as a determinant for creamy layer status.
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.