Supreme Court's OBC creamy layer ruling: Centre seeks clarification on implementation
The Supreme Court's March 11 judgment in the Rohith Nathan case found the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) incorrectly applied the income test for OBC creamy layer exclusion. The Centre is now seeking clarification on retrospective implementation, citing potential "cascading effects" on settled services since 2012 and difficulties in identifying non-creamy layer status for past years. The DoPT also requested to continue applying the old income test rules for CSE 2025 candidates. This situation highlights the complex balance between ensuring substantive justice for candidates and maintaining administrative practicality and stability in reservation policy.
Key Points
- The Supreme Court's March 11 judgment in the Rohith Nathan case ruled against DoPT's incorrect application of the income test for OBC creamy layer exclusion.
- The Centre seeks clarification on retrospective implementation, citing potential "cascading effects" on settled services since 2012.
- Difficulties include identifying non-creamy layer status for past years and potential disruption to existing services.
- The Centre also requested to continue the old income test rules for CSE 2025 candidates.
- The case highlights the tension between ensuring fairness to candidates and administrative feasibility in reservation policy.
Exam Facts
- Supreme Court judgment date: March 11.
- Case name: Rohith Nathan case.
- Government body: Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT).
- Constitutional Articles: Article 14 (Equality), Article 15(4) & 16(4) (Reservation enabling provisions).
- CSE 2025 candidates mentioned.
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.