‘Annual income not basis for deciding creamy layer’

‘Annual income not basis for deciding creamy layer’

Apex Court Says It Has To Be Done On The Basis Of A Mix Of Social, Economic And Other Relevant Factors

AmitAnand.Choudhary@timesgroup.com

New Delhi:25.08.2021

Holding that annual earnings cannot be the sole criterion for identifying the ‘creamy layer’ among the backward communities to deny reservation, the Supreme Court on Tuesday held that it has to be done on the basis of a mix of social, economic and other relevant factors and not the economic criteria alone.

A bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and Aniruddha Bose quashed 2016 notification issued by the Haryana government by which sections of backward classes earning above ₹6 lakh per annum were to be considered as ‘creamy layer’. The bench said the decision of the state government was in violation of the principles laid down by the apex court in Indra Sawhney case.

The court said the Haryana Backward Classes (Reservation in Services and Admission in Educational Institutions) Act, 2016 makes it mandatory for identification and exclusion of ‘creamy layer’ to be on the basis of social, economic and other relevant factors but the the state wrongly sought to determine ‘creamy layer’ solely on the basis of economic criterion and has committed a “grave error” in doing so.

“Therefore, we quash the notification, giving liberty to the state government to issue a fresh notification within a period of 3 months from today after taking into account the principles laid down by this court in Indra Sawhney case and the criteria mentioned in Section 5(2) of the 2016 Act for determining creamy layer,” the bench said. The court, however, said that admissions to educational institutions and appointment to state services on the basis of the notifications shall not be disturbed.

The court noted that the notification issued by the state in 1995 was in tune with the judgment of the court in Indra Sawhney case but the 2016 notification was in violation of the verdict.

“The said notification excluded certain persons who held constitutional posts and those who were in employment of the state and the Centre in higher posts from the benefit of reservation. In addition, the social advancement of other categories was taken into account for the purpose of including such categories in ‘creamy layer’. Strangely, by 2016 notification, the identification of ‘creamy layer’ amongst backward classes was restricted only to the basis of economic criterion. In clear terms, this court held in Indra Sawhney case that the basis of exclusion of ‘creamy layer’ cannot be merely economic,” the bench said.

Referring to Indra Sahney verdict, the court said it was held that persons from backward classes who occupied posts in higher services like IAS, IPS and All-India Services had reached a higher level of social advancement and economic status and therefore, were not entitled to be treated as backward.

“Such persons were to be treated as ‘creamy layer’ without any further inquiry. Likewise, people with sufficient income who were in a position to provide employment to others should also be taken to have reached a higher social status and therefore, should be treated as outside the backward class. Similarly, persons from backward classes who had higher agricultural holdings or were receiving income from properties, beyond a prescribed limit, do not deserve the benefit of reservation. The above-mentioned categories were necessarily to be excluded from backward classes,” the court said.