New Delhi, Aug 1 (PTI) From welcoming the decision as a step towards greater social justice to raising concerns about its implementation without conducting caste census, members of Parliament on Thursday expressed varied reactions to the Supreme Court’s verdict on sub-classifying SCs and STs to allocate separate quotas for the more backward groups within these categories.
In a landmark decision, the SC ruled in favour of sub-classifying Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) to allocate separate quotas for the more backward groups within these categories.
The 7-judge bench, by a 6:1 majority, held that such sub-classification does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.
Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud noted that the subclasses are not excluded from the SC/ST List, emphasising the inherent heterogeneity within these groups.
Reacting to the verdict outside Parliament, Lok Sabha MP Chandrashekhar Azad expressed concerns about the implementation of 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 were, and what their intentions were. All this should come to light.
“If 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 told PTI Videos.
Echoing these sentiments on conducting caste census, Congress MP Pappu Yadav underscored the necessity of a caste-based census for effective implementation.
“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, highlighting the critical role of data in addressing historical injustices.
Shambhavi Chaudhary of the Lok Janshakti Party (Ramvilas) highlighted the fundamental basis of reservation.
“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.
BJP MP Brij Lal welcomed the verdict, asserting it addresses the economic disparities 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 reservation. Instead, poor labourers and farmers living in villages who are doing manual labour should receive reservation. This is a social issue as well, because if someone is deprived of reservation today, their next generation might become poor again. Therefore, I welcome the SC’s judgment,” he stated.
Lal also criticised the Congress and Samajwadi Party (SP), accusing them of historically failing Dalit communities.
Congress MP Sukhdev Bhagat emphasised the importance of representation in reservations, aligning with the apex 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, supporting the verdict’s alignment with constitutional principles. PTI UZM BHJ BHJ
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.