Sub-Categorization in Reservations: Bridging Deep Social Inequalities May Lead to Discontent

New Delhi- On August 1 of this year, a seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling affirming the possibility of sub-categorization within SC/ST reservations. In a 6:1 decision, with Justice Bela Trivedi dissenting, the court granted state governments the freedom to implement sub-categorization to address inequalities within caste groups, provided they have a rational basis. It is undeniable that despite decades of reservation policies, some marginalized castes within Dalit communities have remained deprived of its benefits. This disparity has been repeatedly highlighted by affected groups, leading to legal interventions. Until 2004, such attempts were deemed unconstitutional by courts.

The Supreme Court, however, this time deliberated on precedents like the E.V. Chinnaiah vs. State of Andhra Pradesh case and the issue of sub-quotas for Valmiki and Mazhabi Sikhs in Punjab. The Andhra Pradesh government had previously grouped 57 Scheduled Castes into a sub-category, allocating 15% reservation, while the Punjab government introduced a 50% sub-quota for Valmiki and Mazhabi Sikhs. Both decisions were struck down by the respective High Courts. While the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision in the Andhra case, it referred the Punjab matter to a seven-judge bench. After extensive deliberation, the bench overturned previous rulings and validated sub-quotas within reservations.

Now that the Supreme Court has greenlit sub-categorization within reservations with a 6:1 majority, state governments can proceed to create sub-quotas based on concrete evidence and rational justifications. This principle has already been observed in OBC reservations in states like Bihar, where the government created two categories—Backward and Most Backward Classes—over 55 years ago under the leadership of Karpoori Thakur. However, subsequent governments manipulated these categories to include castes like Dangi, Teli, and Tatma, driven more by vote-bank politics than the actual socio-economic status of these groups. Such interventions undermined the core philosophy of reservations and risk being replicated in sub-categorization efforts today.

This potential misuse has led to apprehension among Bahujan intellectuals, who fear that sub-quotas could exacerbate inequalities instead of alleviating them. Historically, upper-caste-dominated bureaucracies have harbored biases against reservations, often exploiting technicalities to deem candidates from the lower segments of quotas as "not suitable," thereby reallocating reserved seats to the unreserved category. Such practices must be curbed to ensure the integrity of sub-categorization.

While politicians in South India have broadly supported the Supreme Court's decision, it has faced strong opposition from political parties and Dalit leaders in North India. The BJP has remained silent, while reactions within the NDA are divided, with TDP supporting the decision and LJP opposing it. Similarly, BSP and the Azad Samaj Party have expressed their disapproval.

It is true that separate sub-quotas are necessary for the most marginalized sections of Dalit and tribal communities, as endorsed by the court. This decision holds immense significance for Ambedkarite movements, the struggle against Brahmanism, and Dalit politics. It seeks to uplift those at the bottommost rungs of society. However, it is unfortunate that Dalit politics in North India perceives this as a divisive move, a line that could fracture their collective identity.

In a society deeply entrenched in inequality, any effort to forge unity is bound to generate dissent. The question is: will bridging the chasm of inequality foster unity, or will suppressing it sustain the status quo? Some Dalit leaders argue that sub-quotas will disrupt caste solidarity. This argument, however, lacks logical consistency. While many emphasize the need for caste census data to implement such measures, the reality is that substantial data on Dalit communities already exists in general census reports, underscoring the need for sub-quotas.

If we fail to recognize and act on this legitimate demand, we inadvertently align with the same anti-reservation stance that upper castes have historically imposed on marginalized groups. For Dalit politics, this development is an opportunity to address internal inequalities and forge a stronger collective identity. This can only be achieved if Dalit leadership acknowledges the disparities within their communities and boldly commits to uplifting those left behind. True unity and strength will emerge from this recognition, aligning with Dr. Ambedkar's vision of an equitable society.

While discussing caste dynamics, we must remember Ambedkar’s assertion that the hierarchical inequality within castes is the soul of the caste system. Our ultimate goal must be its eradication, and sub-quotas are a step in this direction.

Thus, we must unequivocally support this decision, as it holds the potential to pave the way for a more just and equitable society.

- Author Arun Narayan is a distinguished thinker and advocate of the Bahujan ideology.
Contact: arunnarayanonly@gmail.com