Why IAS officers' children seek quota? Supreme Court's big question on reservation

The Supreme Court on Friday raised questions over the continued extension of reservation benefits to children of economically and educationally advanced families within backward classes, orally observing that social mobility achieved through quotas should eventually lead families out of the reservation system.

Hearing a matter concerning reservation benefits for the creamy layer among backward classes, a bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan questioned the need for reservation for children whose parents are both IAS officers.

"They are both IAS officers, both are in government service. They are very well-placed. Social mobility is there. Now there are government orders excluding all these people and they are questioning the exclusion. This also has to be kept in mind, Justice Nagarathna said.

The court added, "With educational and economic empowerment, there is social mobility. So, then again, seeking reservation for the children, we will never get out of it. That is a matter we have to concern also".

Appearing in the matter, advocate Shashank Ratnoo said the persons concerned were not excluded because of their salary but because of their status and sought for deeper examination and said there had to be a distinction between the Economically Weaker Sections category and the creamy layer.

In response, Justice Nagarathna said that in EWS there is no social backwardness, but only economic backwardness, Live Law reported.

Ratnoo then argued that the criteria for the creamy layer had to be much more liberal than for EWS, and said that if both were treated alike, there would be no difference between them.

Justice Nagarathna further said there had to be some balance. She said that while a person may be socially and educationally backward, the position changes once the parents have attained a certain level after taking advantage of the reservation.

The court issued notice in the plea after hearing these submissions and sought responses from the concerned parties.

The Supreme Court is examining petitions seeking reservation benefits for the creamy layer among backward classes, reviving the question whether economic status can override caste-based social disadvantage.

In the landmark 1992 Supreme Court judgment in the Indra Sawhney judgment, also known as the Mandal case, the court upheld a 27 per cent reservation for OBCs but ruled that the “creamy layer” among them must be excluded from quotas.

The government periodically fixes an income ceiling to identify creamy layer families and at present, OBC families with annual income above Rs 8 lakh are generally classified as creamy layer. Certain categories such as children of high-ranking constitutional functionaries, senior bureaucrats, or top military officers can also be excluded irrespective of income.

In a key judgment in March, the Supreme Court had ruled that the income of parents cannot be the sole criterion for exclusion of a candidate from OBC quota on the ground of being part of the 'creamy layer', stressing that status and category of parents' jobs have to be considered.

- Ends