RESERVATION

Supreme Court on Creamy Layer

Indira Sawhney, Applicant v. Union of India and others, Respondents.

A.M. AHMADI, C.J.I., Mrs. SUJATA V. MANOHAR AND K: VENKATASWAMI, JJ.

Constitution of India, Articles 15, 29 – Other Backward Classes - "Creamy layer" - Direction issued to specify bases - Its non-implementation by State of Kerala in spite of extensions - Supreme Court requested the Chief Justice of Kerala High Court to constitute High Level Committee for obtaining the information.

The Supreme Court (SC) in Mandal Case (1992 AIR SCW 3682) had given direction to the State Governments and Administration of Union Territories to specify within four months the basis for excluding "creamy layer" from OBCs. In spite of granting many extensions the State of Kerala did not implement the direction. In the meantime, Kerala Act 16 of 1995 was passed. The writ petition challenging the constitutionality of that Act was filed and is pending disposal before the SC. In the circumstance the SC decided to get the information itself regarding 'creamy layer" issue through a High-Level Committee. Accordingly, Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court was requested to appoint a retired Judge of the High Court to be the Chairman of the High Level Committee who will induct not more than 4 members from various walks of life to identify the "creamy laver" among the designated other backward classes in Kerala State in the light of the ruling of the SC in Mandal case and forward the report to the SC within 3 months form the date of receipt of the order. The State of Kerala was directed to extend all co-operation including the expenses in this regard. The Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court will fix the terms of the Commission including the honorarium. The State of Kerala will meet with the financial obligation.                                        

(Source: AIR 1997 Supreme Court 597)

Dr. Nathan Glazer On India's Social Transformation

In addition to parameters reflecting economic growth, importance would have to be accorded to indicators of the social conditions while taking stock of the progress made by the nation. As economies grew, they were accompanied by changes in society in addition to conventional measures such as percentage of population living in poverty indices of inequality and physical quality of life, other indicators which threw light on the dynamics of changing societies could be adopted.

Moreover, in order to correctly measure the relationship between the social quality of life and economic growth, "Indians will have to develop their own social indicators that would be meaningful to them," Dr. Glazer noted. With regard to the multicultural dimension of society and the role that could be played by such social indicators, Dr. Glazer was of the opinion that "in a way, social indicators referring to really concrete measures" could be used to know the social conditions of persons belonging to specific cultures, such as "social well-being of minorities ... One of the measures to reduce inter-cultural disparities in multicultural America was providing preferences for Blacks in education, employment and Government contracts.

Contrary to the earlier line of social thought leaning towards the assimilation of diverse cultures, the present tendency communities in a multicultural society. Assertion of identity by individual communities and their mutual co-existence with other communities reflected the acceptance of the multicultural content. This had also resulted in the emergence of sub-identities, which were recognised as a distinct part of larger identities.

(Source: V.S. Sambandam in The Hindu, 23 January, 1997)

Ambedkar on Separate Quota a Must to Empower the deprived

To put a man in a separate category from others is not necessarily an evil. Whether the affixing of a label is good or bad depends upon the underlying purpose. If the object is to deprive him of rights, then such a labelling would no doubt be a grievous wrong. But if the purpose is to mark off as a recipient of a privilege, then far from being a wrong it would be a most beneficial measure. To enroll an Untouchable in a separate electorate roll would be objectionable if the object was to deprive him of the right of franchise. To enroll him in a separate electorate, roll for giving him the benefit of special representation would certainly be an advantage to him. Looked at from the point of view of ultimate purpose it is difficult to see how any person who claims to be the friend of the Untouchables could object to separate electorates for them.

[Source: The Dalit Voice, 1-15 May, 1997]