No provision for ‘creamy layer’ in reservation for SC/STs: Centre

Briefing reporters after the cabinet meeting on Friday, Union Information and Broadcasting Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw said there was a detailed discussion at the meeting on a recent Supreme Court judgment that made certain suggestions on the reservation for the SCs and STs.

New Delhi: There is no provision for a “creamy layer” in reservation for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) in the Constitution as envisaged by B.R. Ambedkar, the Union Cabinet chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi has affirmed.

Briefing reporters after the cabinet meeting on Friday, Union Information and Broadcasting Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw said there was a detailed discussion at the meeting on a recent Supreme Court judgment that made certain suggestions on the reservation for the SCs and STs.

---

He said the cabinet is of a well-thought-out view that the NDA government is committed towards the provisions of the Constitution.

“According to the Constitution given by B.R. Ambedkar, there is no provision for a creamy layer in the SC-ST reservation,” Vaishnaw said.

Earlier in the day, Prime Minister Modi met a delegation of MPs from the SC and ST communities, and reiterated the government’s resolve for the welfare of the communities.

The delegation reportedly submitted a memorandum concerning the Supreme Court’s recent observation on the “creamy layer” for SCs and STs.

“Met a delegation of SC/ST MPs today. Reiterated our commitment and resolve for the welfare and empowerment of the SC/ST communities,” Prime Minister Modi posted on X after the meeting.

Notably, the Supreme Court on August 1 suggested the application of the creamy layer principle to the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) for availing benefits of affirmative action.

A 7-judge Constitution Bench was dealing with the question of whether a sub-classification amongst reserved category groups for giving more beneficial treatment would be permissible under the Constitution.

In a 6:1 decision, the majority overturned its 2004 judgement, which had ruled against giving preferential treatment to certain sub-castes within scheduled castes (SCs).