THE DEBATE OVER SUB-CLASSIFICATION OF SCs & STs IN INDIA

Critics argue that without a creamy layer filter, the benefits of sub-classification could favor the relatively privileged within sub-categories rather than the most marginalized.

- DR. PRASHANT KUMAR & DR. SHREE RAM MALANI

The discourse around sub-classifying Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) in India is a complex and deeply sensitive issue. It brings to the forefront fundamental questions about fairness, equity, and social justice. While there is an undeniable need to ensure that the most vulnerable groups within these communities receive adequate support, there is also legitimate concern that additional sub-classifications could lead to fragmentation and undermine the overarching goals of existing policies. The debate over sub-classification is not merely about administrative adjustments; it touches on the very fabric of India's approach to affirmative action.

CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK

The Indian Constitution lays down a framework for equality and non-discrimination through Articles 14, 15, 16, and 341. Article 14 guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the law, while Article 15 prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. However, both Articles 15 and 16 also allow for positive discrimination, enabling special provisions for socially and educationally backward classes, which include SCs and STs.

Article 341 further grants the President of India the authority to officially designate groups as Scheduled Castes, providing them with certain protections and benefits. However, once a group is included in this list, only Parliament can make modifications. This creates a legal framework where the rights and benefits of SCs and STs are tightly governed, leaving little room for sub-categorization at the state level.

THE LEGAL BATTLE