New Delhi: A Scheduled Caste or Backward Class Hindu, upon converting to Islam, cannot claim to be a Backward Class (BC) Muslim and seek reservation benefits, the Madras High Court held earlier this week.
The judgement, delivered on 24 June, struck down a 2024 Tamil Nadu government order (GO) that said a convert to Islam from Backward Classes, Most Backward Classes, Denotified Communities or Scheduled Castes may be treated as BC (Muslim) for availing reservation. Such a convert may be issued with a community certificate as belonging to one of the seven sects notified as BC (Muslim), the GO also said.
The substance of the decision given by a bench of Justices G.R. Swaminathan and P.B. Balaji is that when a person converts to Islam, they become a Muslim, and their place in the community is not determined by the caste to which they belonged to before conversion.
The moot question before the court was whether Tamil Nadu’s 9 March, 2024 GO was constitutionally valid. The court answered it in the negative, pulling up the state for issuing the same. According to the court, the GO was an attempt to override previous rulings of the high court and Supreme Court that have held otherwise. The court saw it as a transgression by the executive, a flouting of the separation of power doctrine, an essential constituent of the rule of law.
The high court also evaluated the background in which the GO was introduced. The notification followed a Madras High Court order of December 2022 which rejected a petition filed by a Muslim who said he was entitled to reservation in public employment because he belonged to a backward class before conversion. The state government had the contended that such a candidate would be considered under the general category.
“The said decision probably disincentivised conversion to Islam as the beneficiaries of reservation face the prospect of losing the said benefit. Islam being a proselytizing religion, its votaries naturally took up the matter with the government,” the high court bench noted in its Wednesday order.
The high court order came on petition filed by Sameer Ahamed, formerly Paramasivam. Born to a Hindu couple in Thoothukudi district, he embraced Islam in 2015, changed his name and married as per the adopted religion.
In terms of the 2024 GO, he applied for a community certificate that categorized him as ‘Muslim Lebbai’, one of seven sects of Backward Class Muslims listed in the state GO. However, this application was rejected following which Sameer moved the high court where he quoted the Tamil Nadu GO to back his case.
Since questions were raised over the constitutional validity of the GO, the state defended the order that was based on the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Commission’s recommendation. The state informed the court that only those who enjoyed reservation benefits before conversion would continue to be beneficiaries after embracing Islam.
However, the court in its 24 June order rejected the state’s argument, noting the matter was referred to the commission following the high court’s 2022 judgement.
It quoted a 1952 high court judgement, stating a Hindu, who is a member of one of the castes or sub-castes, when converts to Islam ceases to be a member of any caste.
The top court not just approved this judgement; it later delivered more decisions upholding this rule. The last Supreme Court judgement covering this issue was pronounced on 26 November 2024, months after the Tamil Nadu government notified its March GO, noted the HC.
The Tamil Nadu Additional Advocate General vehemently defended the GO. He submitted that the recommendation of the commission was binding, and that the GO was not issued arbitrarily. A detailed deliberation preceded the commission’s report, the court was informed. Since a backward class member, upon adopting Islam, was getting the reservation benefits, the GO did not affect the social balance. It was further argued the identified sects in Islam follow particular faith and practices and it was for the Jamath concerned to accept the convertee in one of the sects. Once the Jamath has issued a certificate, it is not for the revenue authority to question the same, the state law officer told the bench.
But the court remained unconvinced. It did not question the reservation policy since it was meant to further a constitutional mandate. The GO rightly provides reservation for certain categories of Muslim community, considering their backwardness, the court said.
However, it found the GO arbitrary because it altered a proposition laid by the high court’s division bench that holds the field and cannot be undone by a mere government order. “The legislature cannot declare any decision of a court of law to be void or of no effect. A court’s decision must always bind unless the conditions on which it is based or so fundamentally altered that the decision could not have been given in the altered circumstances,” the court said, referring to the 1952 verdict.
By recognizing that there can be conversion to any one of the seven sects of Muslims identified as Backward Class Muslim, the GO, court held, has undermined the high court’s 1952 decision and subsequent rulings as well.
The court declared the GO arbitrary for one more reason. It said the order provides for accommodating a Hindu convertee from either a Backward Class, Most Backward Class, Scheduled Caste in any one of the seven slots reserved for the Muslim community. This clubbing, it said, put a Scheduled Caste, who is at the bottom-most rung of the social ladder on par with a Backward class member.
The bunching was a violation of top court’s judgements that explicitly say Other Backward Classes and Scheduled Castes form separate categories. The high court rejected it as an “inherent flaw” in the government’s approach to reservation for converts.
The order also discussed a length principles of social equality seen in Christianity and Islam, and said, unlike Hinduism, where caste is an inherent feature, the two religions seek to establish an egalitarian society.
“Having taken such a stand for effecting conversions, it is disingenuous to claim that there is hierarchy in Islam also,” the court said, adding “categorising certain sects as Backward and the remaining as Forward is antithetical to Quranic injunctions.”
Though there is no social hierarchy in Islam, the court took note of historical reasons due to which the community was also “stratified into various communities,” “akin to caste in Hinduism”. However, the bench clarified that just as caste is determined by birth in Hinduism, the same concept prevails in Islam. Hence to suggest that one can be converted into a BC (Muslim) was ridiculous.
(Edited by Nardeep Singh Dahiya)
Also Read: SC sets record straight for OBC quota—social status, not paycheck must be measure for ‘creamy layer’