Context:

• On 13 August 2025, the Supreme Court decided to hear a petition filed by Ramshankar Prajapati, demanding the implementation of the creamy layer system in SC/ST reservations, similar to OBCs.

Key Points:

• The petition argues that the current reservation policy benefits the affluent and influential sections within SC/ST communities more, while the most deprived remain trapped in the cycle of poverty.
• The petitioner has demanded a two-tier reservation system based on economic criteria, giving priority to the economically weaker sections.
• A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi issued a notice to the central government and scheduled the hearing for 10 October 2025.
• The petition cited the Supreme Court’s August 2024 judgment (Punjab vs. Davinder Singh), where the Court had suggested developing a policy to identify the creamy layer within SC/ST and exclude them from reservation benefits.

Supreme Court’s August 2024 Judgment:

• The Supreme Court’s decision on 1 August 2024 (State of Punjab and Others vs. Davinder Singh and Others) is a historic verdict on the issue of sub-classification within Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) reservations.
• This decision was given by a seven-judge Constitution Bench with a 6:1 majority.

Key points of the judgment:

Constitutional support for sub-classification:

• The Supreme Court held that sub-classification among SC/ST for equal distribution of reservation benefits is valid. That is, now state governments can create sub-categories within Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes so that reservation benefits actually reach the most backward and needy groups.

Recommendation for the creamy layer concept:

• The judgment also stated that the path is open for implementing the creamy layer provision for SC/ST classes. However, this creamy layer should be different from that of OBCs and adapted to special circumstances.
• Those considered part of the creamy layer will not get the benefit of reservation so that the benefits reach truly needy parents and individuals.

Powers to state governments:

• States have been given the power to determine their own criteria for SC/ST sub-classification and creamy layer. The objective is to fulfill the real aim of reservation — social justice and benefits to the deprived sections.

Majority vs. Minority:

• Six judges recognized sub-classification, while one opposed it. The dissent was based on the concern that broad social reservation could be reduced to purely economic and class-based criteria.

Creamy Layer

A socio-economic concept created to identify relatively affluent and educated sections within the backward classes (OBC), who are excluded from reservation benefits.

• Its aim is to ensure that only those who are truly socially and educationally backward get the benefit of reservation.

Origin of the creamy layer concept:

• Source: The idea came from the recommendations of the Mandal Commission in 1979
• Legal basis: In the 1992 Indra Sawhney vs. Union of India judgment, the Supreme Court made provisions for its implementation
• • The Court said that it is necessary to exclude the “affluent” class from OBC reservations

Scope of creamy layer implementation:

• Applied only to Other Backward Classes (OBC)
• Not applied to SC/ST classes (though debated from time to time)

Creamy layer income limit:

• Initially ₹1 lakh (1993)
• Revised several times —

• • 2004: ₹2.5 lakh
  • 2008: ₹4.5 lakh
  • 2013: ₹6 lakh
  • 2017: ₹8 lakh (current limit)

Currently, if an OBC family’s annual income exceeds ₹8 lakh, it falls under the creamy layer and is not eligible for reservation.

Criteria for determining creamy layer:

• Economic: Annual family income limit (₹8 lakh)
• Social/Occupational:
• Parents in high-ranking positions (IAS, IPS, IFS, All India Services)
• High-grade officers in central/state governments
• Persons at top-level posts in the public sector
• Armed forces officers of Colonel rank or above

• •  Agricultural income is excluded from this calculation

Important judicial references:

• Indra Sawhney Case (1992): Recognition of the creamy layer concept
• Ashoka Kumar Thakur Case (2008): Application of creamy layer in OBC reservation in educational institutions

Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST)

• Scheduled Castes (SC): Castes listed in the Indian Constitution that historically faced untouchability, social discrimination, and economic backwardness.
• Scheduled Tribes (ST): Tribal communities primarily living in remote and forest areas, with distinct culture, language, traditions, and lifestyles, historically isolated from the mainstream.

Constitutional provisions:

• Article 341: Power to determine the list of Scheduled Castes.
• Article 342: Power to determine the list of Scheduled Tribes.
• The President issues notifications to determine SC/ST lists, and Parliament holds the power to amend them.

Reservation and special rights:

• • Reservation in education, employment, and political representation: For SC — 15%, for ST — 7.5% (in central services and education)

Constitutional safeguards:

• Articles 15(4), 16(4): Special provisions for social and educational advancement
• Article 46: Promotion of educational and economic interests of SCs, STs, and other weaker sections

Major laws related to SC/ST:

• SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Aims to prevent discrimination, exploitation, and violence against SC/ST communities, with strict penalties and provision for special courts
• Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950
• Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950

Population and distribution in India (Census 2011):

• SC population: ~201.4 million (~16.6% of total population)
• ST population: ~104.5 million (~8.6% of total population)
• Highest SC percentage: Punjab (~31.9%)
• Highest ST percentage: Mizoram (~94.4%)

Other Backward Classes (OBC):

• Castes and communities that are socially and educationally backward but not included in the Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) categories.
• OBCs are given reservation benefits in education, government jobs, and other areas to improve their socio-economic status.

Constitutional and legal basis:

• Articles 15(4) and 16(4): Power to make special provisions for socially and educationally backward classes
• Mandal Commission (1979): Set up under B.P. Mandal, recommended in 1980 to provide 27% reservation for OBCs
• Indra Sawhney vs. Union of India (1992): Upheld 27% OBC reservation but directed exclusion of the “creamy layer”

Types of OBC:

• Central List OBC: Recognized for central government jobs and educational institutions
• State List OBC: Recognized only for state government jobs and institutions

Reservation system (central level): 27% for OBC (excluding creamy layer)

Reservation system (state level): Percentage varies by state; some states have sub-categorized OBC (e.g., OBC-A, OBC-B)

Reservation and Related Constitutional Articles