The Supreme Court has raised the question of non-availability of creamy layers in Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SC/ST) Reservation. The court asked whether people above the social, economic and educational level of SC/ST are not entitled to the rights of backward classes of their own. During the incense debate on Thursday, the court gave a signal to the constitution bench to consider it for consideration.
In fact, the Supreme Court is hearing SC/ST on the issue of reservation in the promotion to the Constitution. During this hearing, the care of the court went towards the implementation of the creamy layer in SC/ST reservation. Justice Kurien Joseph questioned senior advocate Indra Jaisingh in the matter, why should those who have raised above SC’s class now get the benefit of reservation? Why the creamy layer of SC/ST should not be excluded from the benefits of reservation.
In this question of Justice Kurien, the second judge of the bench, R Bhanumathi, also supported and said, “Our question is, why people who have grown up to social, educational and financially, get the benefit of reservation while people of the same class have left behind them.
Only parliament can make law amendment in the list?
Can the State Governments exclude such people from the SC/ST list? Senior advocate PS Patwalia said that the backwardness fund of SC/ST will not apply. Only parliament can make any class from the SC/ST list and make it out of the law.
Then why not consult with the state?
Justice Kurien asked again if the state government has no right, then in the provision of Article 16 (4) (A) (reservation in promotion), what is the meaning of the matter of consultation with the state? On the plea of non-backwardness funding in SC/ST, the court said that the principle of social justice behind reservation is similar. Indra Jaisingh said that the President decides who will be in the scheduled caste list and who is not? The only right to remove anyone from the list is to the Parliament.
Raised inside a single class why can’t a person be out?
Justice Kurien had a question that if the parliament removes any class from the list then the whole class will be out. But their question is about the front and back of the same class. A person who is above the above is about to be excluded so that the backward class of the same class, in the back line, can get the benefit of the reservation.
Jai Singh said that SC/ST has not been given reservation for backwardness, but for social discrimination with him. The person is upset with the person’s elevation. Even today in such a case, they come to see. He said that reservation is not just about backwardness, it is also a matter of governance and participation in power. After all, why is the matter of reservation of women in Parliament? Or why is it asked how many female judges are in the Supreme Court? Representation is guaranteed through representation.