http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 106  

PETITIONER: K.C. VASANTH KUMAR & ANOTHER.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF KARNATAKA

DATE OF JUDGMENT08/05/1985

BENCH: CHANDRACHUD, Y.V. ((CJ) BENCH: CHANDRACHUD, Y.V. ((CJ) DESAI, D.A. REDDY, O. CHINNAPPA (J) SEN, A.P. (J) VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J)

CITATION:  1985 AIR 1495            1985 SCR  Supl. (1) 352  1985 SCC  Supl.  714     1985 SCALE  (1)832  CITATOR INFO :  RF         1988 SC 959  (14)  E          1988 SC2287  (2)

ACT:      Constitution  of  India,  1950,  Articles  15(4),16(4), 29(2), 338(3) and 340- Validity of the Means test adopted in State of  Karnataka order dated 22.2.1977 as modified by the Government Order  dated March  1, 1979  and June  27,  1979- Guidelines for  making special provision for the advancement of  any  socially  and  educationally  backward  classes  of citizens and  provision for  the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward classes of citizens which in to opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services  of the State- Conflict between "the menitoriam principle   and"    the    "compensatory    principle"    of discrimination’   in   the   matter   of   admissions   into institutions imparting  higher education  and of  entry into Government service,  how to be solved-Statutory construction of the  word "Backward classes" ejusdem qenesis Rule or Rule Noscitur a sociis, explained-Construction of Articles 338(3) and 340  of the  Constitutions-Government’s  power  to  make reservations under  Articles 15(4)  and 16(4) and the extent of  reservation   that  can  be  made,  explained-Words  and Phrases-Meaning  of   "backwardness"   "backward   classes", socially and educationally backward classes",

HEADNOTE:      In the  pre-independent  period,  the  former  princely State of  Mysore which  now  forms  part  of  the  State  of Karnataka is  one of  the earliest  States in the country in which the  system of  reservation for  backward  classes  in public services  was introduced.  In 1918, the Government of His Highness  the Maharaja  of Mysore  appointed a committee under the  chairmanship Or  Sir  Leslie  C.  Miller,  Chief, Justice of  the Chief  Court of  Mysore to  investigate  and report on  the problem  of backward  classes. The  questions referred to  that Committee  were (i)  changes needed in the then existing  rules of  recruitment to the public services; (ii) special facilities to encourage higher and professional

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 106  

education among  the members  of backward  classes and (iii) any other  special measures which might be taken to increase the representation  of backward  communities in  the  public service without  materially affecting  the  efficiency,  due regard being  paid also  to the general good accruing to the State by  a wider  diffusion of  education  and  feeling  of increased status  which will  thereby  be  produced  in  the backward communities. The expressions ’backward classes’ and ’backward communities,  were used almost interchangeably and that the  contained in  Article 335 of the Constitution that any  reservation  made  should  not  impair  efficiency  was anticipated more  than three decades before the Constitution was enacted.  The committee  submitted its  report  in  1921 containing its  opinion that  all communities  in the  State other  than   Brahmins  should  be  understood  as  backward communities regarding  whom it made certain recommendations. The 353 Government  orders   issued  on  the  basis  of  the  Report continued to  be in  force till 1956 i.e. there organisation of States  which brought  together five integrating A units- the former  State of  Mysore (including  Bellary  District), Coorg, four  districts of  Bombay, certain  portions of  the State of  Hyderabad and the district of Sough Kanara and the Kollegal Taluk  which formerly  formed part  of the State of Madras. There  were different  lists of backward communities in the  five integrating  units and  they  were  allowed  to continue for  sometime  even  after  the  reorganisation  of States.      In order to bring about uniformity the State Government issued  a  notification  containing  the  list  of  backward classes for the purpose of Article 15(4) of the Constitution at the  beginning of 1959. The validity of that notification and of  another notification  issued thereafter  on the same topic which  according to  the State  Government had treated all  persons   except  Brahmins,  Banias  and  Kayasthas  as backward communities was challenged before the High Court of Mysore in  Rama Krishna  Singh v.  State of Mysore, AIR 1950 Mysore 338.  The two  notifications were  struck down by the High  Court   holding  (a)   in  as  much  as  the  impugned notifications contained  list of  backward classes including 55 per  cent of  the population  of the  State and all Hindu communities other  than Brahmins,  Banias and  Kayasthas and all other  non-Hindu communities  in the State except Anglo- Indians and  Parsees had been treated as backward classes it resulted more  in a  discrimination against the few excluded communities consisting  of about  5 per  cent of  the  total population rather  than making  provision for  socially  and educationally backward  classes; (b)  making  provision  for communities which  were slightly  backward to  the so called forward communities  did not  amount to making provision for the communities which really needed protection under Article (15(4) of  the Constitution;  (c) socially and educationally backward classes  can in  some cases  be determined  on  the basis of castes.      Therefore, the State Government constituted a Committee on January  8, 1960  under the  Chairmanship of  Dr R. Nagan Gowda for  the purpose  of determining  the criteria for the classification of  backward classes  in the  State with  the following tern  s of  reference: (i) to suggest the criteria to be adopted in determining which sections of the people in the State  should be  treated as  socially and educationally backward and  (ii) to  suggest the exact manner in which the criteria thus  indicated should  be followed  to enable  the State Government  to determine the persons who should secure

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 106  

such preference  as  may  be  determined  by  Government  in respect  of   admissions  to   technical  institutions   and appointment  to  Government  services.  The  said  committee submitted its  Interim Report  on February  19, 1960. On the basis of  the Interim  Report of  the Committee,  the  State Government passed  an order  dated June  9,  1960  regarding admissions  to   professional  and   technical  institutions reserving 22  per cent of seats for backward classes, 15 per cent for  Scheduled Castes  and 3  per  cent  for  Scheduled Tribes and the remaining 60 percent of seats were allowed to be filled  upon  the  basis  of  merit.  The  order  of  the Government was challenged before the High Court of Mysore in S.A. Partha & Ors. v. The State of Mysore & Ors. A.J.R. 1961 Mys. 220.  The High Court found that the direction contained in the  Government order  to the  effect that if any seat or seats reserved  for candidates  belonging to  the  Scheduled Castes 354 and Scheduled  Tribes remained  unfilled, the  same shall be filled  by  candidates  A  of  other  backward  classes  was unconstitutional. It also gave some directions regarding the manner in  which the calculation of the quota of reservation be made.  Thereafter the  Final Report  was submitted by the Nagan Gowda  Committee on  May 16,  1961. After  taking into consideration the  recommendations made  in the said Report, the State  Government issued  an order  for the  purpose  of Article 15 (4) of the Constitution on July 10, 1961. By that order, the  State Government  specified 81 classes of people as backward  classes and  135  classes  of  people  as  more backward  classes   and  reserved   30  percent   of   seat- professional and  technical institutions  for  backward  and more backward  classes. 15  per cent  and 3  per cent of the seats were  reserved  for  Scheduled  Castes  and  Scheduled Tribes respectively  and the  remaining 52  per cent  of the seats were  allowed to be filled up on merit. This order was challenged before  the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitutions in  M. R.  Balaji &  Ors v.  State  of  Mysore [1963] Supp. 1 SCR 439.      In this  land mark  decision of  the Supreme Court, the meaning of  the term  "socially and  educationally  backward classes" appearing  in Article  15(4) was  explained as "The backwardness  under   Article  15(4)   must  be  social  and educational. It  is not  either social or educational but it is both  social and educational." After explaining as to how social and  educational backwardness  has to  be determined, and the  question of determination of the classes which were educationally backward, the court held that the inclusion of the members  of  the  Lingayat  community  in  the  list  of backward classes was erroneous. On the question of extent of reservation that  can be  made the  Court held that speaking generally and  in a broad way, a special provision should be less then 50 per cent; how much less than 50 per cent should depend upon  the relevant  prevailing circumstances  in each case." and thus allowed the petition      Thereafter, the  Government passed  another order dated July 26,  1963 which  directed that 30 per cent of the seats in professional  and  technical  colleges  and  institutions should be  reserved for  backward classes as defined in that order and  that 18  per cent of the seats should be reserved for the  Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The criteria laid down  in that order for determining social and economic backwardness were  two-fold-income and occupation. It stated that those  who followed  occupations of  agriculture, petty business, inferior  service,  crafts  or  other  occupations involving manual  labour and  whose family  income was  less

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 106  

than Rs.  1,200 per annum were to be treated as belonging to backward classes.  This order was questioned before the High Court in  D.G. Viswanath  v. Government  of  Mysore  &  Ors. A.l.R. 1964 Mys. 132 by some petitioners on various grounds. The High  Court dismissed  the petitions  observing that the determination of  the backward  classes without reference to caste altogether  was not  correct and it expressed the hope that the  State would make a more appropriate classification lest its bonafides should be questioned. In the appeal filed against this judgment in R. Chitralekha & H. Anr. v State of Mysore & Ors [196416 SCR 368 the Supreme Court explained the inconsistency between  the  High  Court  judgment  with  the decision in  Balaji’s case and observed that "Two principles stand out prominently from 355 Balaji, namely,  (i) the caste of a group of citizens may be a  relevant   circumstance  in   ascertaining  their  social backwardness; and  (ii) though  it is a relevant A factor to determine the  social backwardness  of class of citizens, it cannot be  the sole or dominant test in that behalf-casts is only   a   relevant   circumstance   in   ascertaining   the backwardness of a class and there is nothing in the judgment of the Supreme Court which precludes the authority concerned from determining  the social  backwardness  of  a  group  of citizens if  it can do so without reference to caste." While this Court  has not  excluded caste  from  ascertaining  the backwardness of  a class of citizens, it has not made it one of compelling  circumstances,  affording  a  basis  for  the ascertainment of backwardness of a class.      Thereafter the State Government appointed the Karnataka Backward Classes  Commission under  the Chairmanship  of Sri L.G. Havanur  which after an elaborate enquiry submitted its report in  four massive  volumes on  November  19,1975.  The Commission recommended  that person  belonging  to  backward classes for  purposes of  Article 15(4)  of the Constitution should be divided into three groups-(a) backward communities consisting of  15 castes  (b) backward  castes consisting of 128 castes  and (c) backward tribes consisting of 62 tribes. For purposes  of Article  16(4)  of  the  Constitution,  the Commission divided  the backward  classes into  (a) backward communities  consisting   of  9  castes(b)  backward  castes consisting of  115 castes and (c) backward tribes consisting of  61   tribes.  According   to  the  Commission,  backward communities were  those  castes  whose  student  average  of students passing  SSLC examination  in 1972  per thousand of population was  below the  State average (which was 1.69 per thousand) but  above 50  per cent  of the  State average and backward castes  and backward  tribes were  those castes and tribes whose  student average  was below  50 per cent of the State average  except in the case of Dombars and Voddars and those who  were Nomadic  and de-notified  tribes. The  total population of  these backward  classes (other than Scheduled Castes and  Scheduled Tribes),  according to the Commission, was about  45 per cent of total population of the State. The difference between the two lists-one under Article 15(4) and the other under Article 16(4) of the Constitution was due to the exclusion  of certain  communities,  castes  and  tribes which were socially and educationally backward but which had adequate  representation  in  the  services  from  the  list prepared for  the purpose  of Article  16(4). The Commission recommended both  for purposes  of Article 15(4) and Article 16(4)  the   percentage  of   reservations:   (i)   Backward communities 16  per cent;  (ii) Backward Castes 10 per cent; and (iii)  Backward Tribes 6 per cent and total 32 per cent. The reservation  of 32  per cent  along  with  18  per  cent

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 106  

reserved for  Scheduled Casts  and Scheduled Tribes together amounted to  50 per cent of the total seats or posts, as the case  may   be.  The   Commission  further   recommended  if seats/posts remained  unfilled  in  the  quota  allotted  to backward tribes,  they  should  be  made  over  to  backward communities and  backward castes  Similarly  if  seats/posts remain unfilled  in the  quota allotted  to backward castes, they  should  be  made  over  to  backward  communities  and backward tribes  If, however, seats/posts remain unfilled in the quota  allotted to  any of  those three categories, they should be  made  over  to  Scheduled  Castes  and  Scheduled Tribes. In  the event  of seats/posts  remaining unfilled by any of  these categories  they should  be transferred to the general pool. 356      After considering the said Report, the State Government issued an  order A  dated  February  22,1977  whereunder  it listed  the   Backward  communities.   Backward  Castes  and Backward Tribes who shall be treated as Backward classes for purposes of  Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution of India. The  order clarified,  (a) that only such citizens of these Backward  Classes whose  family income  per annum from all sources  if Rs.  8000 (Eight  thou sands only) and below shall be  entitled to special treatment under these Articles and (b)  that five categories, namely; an actual cultivator, an artisan,  a petty businessman, one holding an appointment either in Government service or corresponding services under private employment  including casual  labour; and any person self employed  or engaged in any occupation involving manual labour" of  citizens shall  be considered as a special group such citizens  of this  special group whose family income is Rs. 4,800  (Rupees four thousand and eight hundred only) and below per  annum shall  be eligible  for  special  treatment under the  two Articles.  The order  further noted  that (i) Family income  means income  of the  citizen and his parents and if  either of  the parents  is dead, his legal guardian; and (b)  to fix  the reservation  for purposes  of  Articles 15(4) and  16(4) of  the  Constitution  in  respect  of  the Backward classes and the special group of citizens at 40 per cent, the  allocation being  -Backward Communities  (20  per cent), Backward  castes (10 per cent, Backward Tribes (5 per cent), and  special group  (5 per  cent).  In  the  list  of backward communities  mentioned in the Government order, the State Government  included ’ Muslims’ thus making a total of 16 backward  communities. In  the list  of  backward  castes there were  129 castes  including converts into Christianity from   Scheduled   Castes/Scheduled   Tribes   upto   second generation and  62 Scheduled  Tribes.  The  reservation  for backward classes  was 40 percent and taken along with 18 per cent for  Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled  Tribes, the total reservation of  seats/posts came to 58 per cent leaving only 42 per cent for merit pool.      The  Government  order  dated  February  22,  1977  and another notification dated March 4, 1977 issued for purposes of Article  16(4) had  also been  challenged in  a number of writ petitions  filed under  Article 226 of the Constitution before the  High Court  of Karnataka  in S  Somashekarappa & Ors. v  State of  Karnataka &  Ors (Writ Petition No 43;1 of 1977 and  connected writ  petition disposed  of on  April 9, 1979). Allowing  the petitions;  the High  Court quashed (i) the inclusion  of ‘Arasu’ community in the list of ’Backward Communities’ both  for purposes of Article 15(4) and Article 16(4); (ii) the inclusion of the (a) Balija (b) Devadiga (c) Ganiga (d)  Nayinda (e) Rajput and (f) Satani in the list of backward communities  and the  inclusion of  (a)  Banna  (b)

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 106  

Gurkha (c)  Jat (d) Konga (e) Kotari (f) Koyava (g) Malayali (h) Maniyanani  or (Muniyani)  (i) Padatti  (j) Padiyar  (k) Pandavakul (l)  Raval and  (m) Rawat in the list of backward classes for  purposes of  Article 16(4) of the Constitution; and (iii)  reservation  of  20  percent  made  for  Backward communities in the State Civil Services under Article 16(4), reserving liberty  to the  State Government to determine the extent  of   reservation  in   accordance  with   law.   The classification and reservation in other respects was upheld. Special  Leave  Petitions  (Civil)  No.  6656  of  1979  and 985411979 are  filed against  the said Judgment of the  High Court under Article ] 36 of the Constitution. 357      After the  said judgment of the High Court, by an order dated May  1, 1979, the reservation for backward communities was reduced  to 18 per cent A for purposes of Article 16(4). By an  order dated  June  27,  1979,  the  State  Government modified the  Government order  dated February  22, 1977  by increasing the  reservation for  ’Special Group’  from 5 per cent to  15 per  cent both for purposes of Article 15(4) and Article 16(4)  of the  Constitution. Thus  as on  date,  the total reservation  for purposes  of Article  15(4) is 68 per cent and for purposes of Article 16(4) is 66 per cent. There are only  32 per  cent seats  in professional  and technical colleges and  34 per cent posts in Government services which can be filled up on the basis of merit. These writ petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, seek to challenge  the   Constitutional  validity   of   the   State Government orders  dated February 22,1977 as modified by the Government orders dated May ],1979 and June 27,1979.      Disposing of  the petitions  and the appeals by Special Leave, the Court expressed their following opinions,      Per Chandrachud, C.J.      The following  propositions on the issue of reservation may serve  as  a  guideline  to  the  Commission  which  the Government of  Karnataka proposes  to appoint, for examining the question  of affording better employment and educational opportunities to  Scheduled  Castes,  Scheduled  Tribes  and other Backward  Classes which problem is a burning issue to- day.      1. The  reservation in  favour of  scheduled castes and scheduled tribes  must continue  as to  present,  there  is, without the  application of  a means  test,  for  a  further period not  exceeding fifteen  years. Another  fifteen years will  make   it  fifty   years  after   the  advent  of  the Constitution, a  period reasonably  long for the upper crust of the  oppressed classes to overcome the baneful effects of social oppression, isolation and humiliation. [376 C-D]      2. The means test, that is to say, the test of economic backwardness  ought  to  be  made  applicable  even  to  the Scheduled Castes  and  Scheduled  Tribes  after  the  period mentioned in  (1) above. It is essential that the privileged section  of   the  underprivileged  society  should  not  be permitted  to   monopolise  preferential   benefits  for  an indefinite period of time. [376E-F]      3.  In  so  far  as  the  Other  Backward  Classes  are concerned, two  tests should  be conjunctively  applied  for identifying  them   for  the   purpose  of  reservations  in employment  and   education:  One,   that  they   should  be comparable to  the Scheduled  Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the matter  of their backwardness; and two, that they should satisfy the  means test  such as  a State Government may lay down in  the context of prevailing economic conditions. [376 F-G]      4. The  policy of reservations in employment, education

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 106  

and legislative  institutions should  be reviewed every five years or  so. That will at once afford an opportunity (i) to the State  to rectify  distortions arising out of particular facts of the reservation policy and (ii) to the people, both backward and, non- 358 backward, to ventilate their views in a public debate on the practical impact  of A  the policy  of reservations. [376 H; 377 Al      Per Desai J      For a  period of  three and  half decades, the unending search for  identifying socially  and educationally backward classes of  citizens has  defined  the  policy  makers,  the interpreters of  the policy  as  reflected  in  statutes  or executive administrative orders and has added a spurt in the reverse direction,  namely,  those  who  attempted  to  move upward (Pratilom)  in the  social  hierarchy  have  put  the movement in reverse gear so as to move downwards (Anulom) in order to  be identified  as a  group or  class  of  citizens socially  and   educationally  backward.   The  Constitution promised an  egalitarian society;  it  was  a  caste  ridden stratified hierarchical  society. Therefore,  in  the  early stages  of  the  functioning  of  the  Constitution  it  was accepted without  dissent or dialogue that caste furnishes a working criterion for identifying socially and educationally backward class  of  citizens  for  the  purpose  of  Article 15(4).[377 D-G]      The language of Article 15(4) refers to ’class’ and not caste. Preferential treatment which cannot be struck down as discriminatory was  to be  accorded a  class,  shown  to  be socially and  educationally backward  and not to the members of  a   case  who   may  be  presumed  to  be  socially  and educationally backward. [378 A B]      It is  clear from  the decisions  of the  Supreme Court that same  vacillation on  the part  of the judiciary on the question  whether   the  caste   should  be  the  basis  for recognising  the   backwardness.  Judiciary   retained   its traditional  blindfold  on  its  eyes  and  thereby  ignored perceived realities.  The expression  ‘backward classes’  is not defined.  Courts, therefore  have more  or less  in  the absence of  well-defined criteria  not based  on caste label has veered  round to  the view  that in order to be socially and educationally  backward classes, the group must have the same indicia  as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. [378 E; 384 E-F]      State of  Madras v. Srimathi Champakam Dorairajad & Anr [1951] SCR  525; M  R. Balaji & Ors v State of Mysore [1963] Supp. 1  SCR 439;  T. Devadesan  v The  Union of India & Anr [19641 4  SCR 680; R. Chitralekha & Anr. v State of Mysore & Ors. [1964]  6 SCR 368; Triloki Nath & Anr v. State of Jammu JUDGMENT: State of  Jammu &  Kashmir  &  Ors  [1969]  I  SCR  103;  A. Peeriakaruppan etc. v. State of Tamil Nadu [1971] 2 SCR 430, State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. v. U.S.V. Balram etc [19721 3 SCR 247; Janki Prasad Parimoo & Ors etc etc v State of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors. [ 1973] 3 SCR 236; State of Uttar Pradesh v Pradip Tandon  & Ors [1976] 2 SCR 761; State of Kerala & Anr v N  M Thomas & Ors. 11976l 1 SCR 906; Kumari K S Jayasree & Anr v The State of Kerala & Anr. [1977] 1 SCR 194; and Akhil Bhartiya Soshit  Karamchari Sangh  (Railway) represented  by its Assistant General Secretary on behalf of the Association v Union of India & Ors. [1981] 2 SCR 185, referred to.      A caste  is a  horizontal segmental division of society spread over  a district  of a  region or the whole State and also sometimes outside it. The

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 106  

359 concept of  purity and  impurity  conceptualises  the  caste system. There  are four  essential  features  of  the  caste system which  maintained in homo hierarchicus character; (i) hierarchy (ii)  commensality (iii)  restrictions on marriage and (iv)  hereditary  occupation.  Most  of  the  caste  are endogamous groups.  Inter-marriage  between  two  groups  is impermissible.  But  ‘Pratilom’  marriages  are  not  wholly unknown. Similarly with the onward movement of urbanisation, members of  various castes are slowly giving up, traditional occupations and  the pure impure avocations is being frowned upon by  developing notion  of dignity  of  labour.  As  the fruits of  independence were  unequally distributed  amongst various segments  of the  society, in  each caste there came into  existence   a  triple   division  based   on  economic resurgence amongst  the members of the caste. Those who have become economically  well off  have acquired  an upper class status (class  consciousness) and  the one on the step below is the  middle class  and the  third one  belongs to  poorer section of the caste. This led to the realisation that caste culture does  not help  economic interest. In fact the upper crust of  the same caste is verily accused of exploiting the lower strata  of the same caste. Therefore, the basis of the caste system  namely, purity  and pollution  is slowly being displaced by  the economic condition of the various segments of the same caste. It is recognised on almost all hands that the  important   feature  of   the   caste   structure   are progressively suffering  erosion. The  new organisation, the so-called caste  organisation,  is  substantially  different from the  traditional caste  structure and  caste  councils. Economic differentiation  amongst the  members of  the caste has become  sharp,  but  not  so  sharp  as  to  bury  caste sentiments and  ties. In  the face of this transformation of the caste  structure, caste label can not be accepted as the basis for  determining social  and educational backwardness, but the class or the social group should be examined [385 C- H; 386 A-D]      Caste in  rural society is more often than not mirrored in the  economic power  wielded by it and vice versa. Social hierarchy and  economic  position  exhibit  an  undisputable mutuality. The  lower the caste, the poorer its members. The poorer the  members of  a caste,  the lower the caste. Caste and economic situation, reflecting each other as they do are the Deus  ex-Machina of  the social  status occupied and the economic power  wielded by  an individual  or class in rural society. Social  status and  economic power are so woven and fused into the caste system in Indian rural society that one may, without  hesitation, say  that if poverty be the cause, caste is  the primary  index of social backwardness, so that social  backwardness  is  often  readily  identifiable  with reference to  a person’s  caste So  sadly  and  oppressively deep-rooted is  caste in  our country that it has cut across even  the   barriers  of  religion.  The  caste  system  has penetrated other  religious and  dissentient Hindu  sects to whom the  practice of  caste should be anathema and today we find that  practitioner of  other religious faiths and Hindu dissentients are some times as rigid adherents to the system of caste as the conservative Hindus. [386 E-H]      Shared  situation  in  the  economic  hierarchy,  caste gradation, occupation,  habitation,  style  of  consumption, standard of  literacy and  a variety  of such  other factors appear  to   go  to  make  towards  social  and  educational backwardness. Thus  there is a mad rush for being recognised as belonging to a caste 360

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 106  

which by  its nomenclature  would be included in the list of socially  and  A  educationally  backward  classes.  Certain castes are known by a number of synonymy which vary from one region to  the other  and  making  their  complete  coverage almost  impossible.  The  only  way  out  would  in  such  a situation is  to treat,  if  a  particular  caste  has  been treated as  backward, all  its synonyms whether mentioned in the State  lists or  not as  backward. Again,  some  of  the castes just  for the  sake of  being considered socially and educationally backward,  have degraded themselves to such an extent that  they had no hesitation in attributing different types of  vices to  and associating other factors indicative of backwardness, with their castes. The only remedy for such a malaise is to devise a method for determining socially and educationally backward  classes without  reference to caste, beneficial to  all sections  of people  irrespective of  the caste to which they belong. [387 B-H; 388 A]      A few  other aspects  for rejecting  caste as the basis for identifying social and educational backwardness are: (i) If State  patronage for preferred treatment accepts caste as the only  insignia for  determining social  and  educational backwardness; the  danger looms  large  that  this  approach alone would  legitimise and perpetuate caste system. It does not  go  well  with  our  proclaimed  secular  character  as enshrined  in   the  Preamble   to  the   Constitution.  The assumption that  all  members  of  some  caste  are  equally socially and  educationally backward  is  not  well-founded. Such an  approach  provides  an  over  simplification  of  a complex problem  of identifying  the social  and educational backwardness: (ii)  it is  recognised reservation  has  been usurped by  the economically well-placed section in the same caste; and  (iii) the  caste is,  as is  understood in Hindu Society unknown to Muslims, Parsis, Jews etc. As such, caste criterion would not furnish a reliable yardstick to identify socially and  educationally backward  group in the aforesaid communities though economic backwardness would.                                           [388 P-G; 389 A;F]      Therefore,   the    only   criterion   which   can   be realistically devised  is the  one of economic backwardness. To this  may be  added some  relevant criteria  such as  the secular character  of the group, its opportunity for earning livelihood etc,  but by and large economic backwardness must be the load-star. [389 F]      Chronic poverty  is the  bane of Indian Society. Market economy and  money  spinning  culture  has  transformed  the general behaviour  of the society towards its members. Upper caste does  not enjoy  the status  or respect,  traditional, voluntary or  forced any  more even  in rural  areas what to speak of highly westernised urban society. The bank balance, the property  holding and   the  money power  determine  the social  status   of  the   individual  and   guarantee   the opportunities to  rise to the top echelon. How the wealth is acquired has  lost significance. Purity of means disappeared with Mahatma  Gandhi and  we have reached a stage where ends determine  the   means.  This   is  the  present  disturbing situation whether one likes it or not. [389 G-H; 390 A-B]      Reservation in  one or  other form  has been  there for decades. If  a survey  is made with reference to families in various castes  considered to  be socially and educationally backward, about  the benefits  of  preferred  treatment,  it would 361 unmistakably show  that the  benefits  of  reservations  are snatched away  by the  top  creamy  layer  of  the  backward castes. This has to be avoided at any cost.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 106  

                                                    [390 E]      If economic  criterion for  compensatory discrimination or affirmative  action is  accepted, it  would strike at the root cause  of  social  and  educational  backwardness,  and simultaneously  take  a  vital  step  in  the  direction  of destruction of  caste structure  which in turn would advance the secular  character of the Nation. This approach seeks to translate into  reality the  twin constitutional goals: one, to strike at the perpetuation of the caste stratification of the Indian  Society so as to arrest progressive movement and to  take  a  firm  step  towards  establishing  a  casteless society;   and   two,   to   progressively   eliminate   the disadvantageous sections  of  the  society  to  raise  their position and  be part  of the mainstream of life which means eradication of  poverty. However,  this does  not deal  with reservation in  favour of  Scheduled  Castes  and  Scheduled Tribes.   Thousands   of   years   of   discrimination   and exploitation cannot be wiped out in one generation. But even here  economic  criterion  is  worth  applying  by  refusing preferred treatment  to those  amongst them who have already benefited by  it and  improved their  position. And  finally reservation must  have a time span otherwise concession tend to become vested interests. [391 E-H; 392 A]      Per Chinnappa Reddy .r.      The paradox  of the  system of  reservation that may be made under  Articles 15(4),16(4)  read  with  29(2)  of  the Constitution is  that it  has engendered  a spirit  of  self denigration among  the people.  Nowhere else in the world do castes, classes  or communities  queue up  for the  sake  of gaining the  backward status.  Nowhere else  in the world is there competition  to assert  backwardness and  to claim ’we are  more  backward  than  you’.  This  is  an  unhappy  and disquieting situation, but it is stark reality. [392 E-F]      2. The Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and other socially and  educationally backward  classes, all  of  whom have been compendiously described as ’the weaker sections of the people’, have long journeys to make unsociety. They need aid; they  need facility;  they need  launching;  they  need propulsion. Their  needs are  their demands. The demands are matters of  right and  not of  philanthropy.  They  ask  for parity, and  not charity.  They claim  their  constitutional right to  equality of status and of opportunity and economic and social  justice. Several  bridges have to be erected, so that they  may cross the Rubicon. Professional education and employment under  the State  are  thought  to  be  two  such bridges. Hence the special provision for advancement and for reservation  under   Articles  15(4)   and  16(4)   of   the Constitution. [393 C-D]      3. Courts  are not  necessarily the  most competent  to identify the  backward classes or to lay down guidelines for their identification except in a broad and very general way. Courts are  not equipped  for that;  Courts  have  no  legal barometers to  measure social  backwardness  and  are  truly removed from  the people, particularly those of the backward classes, by  layer upon  layer of gradation and degradation. And, India is such a vast country that conditions 362 vary from  State to  State, region  to region,  ’district to district and  from one  A ethnic  religious,  linguistic  or caste group to another. A test to identify back ward classes which may  appear appropriate  when applied  to one group of people may  be  wholly  inappropriate  and  unreasonable  if applied  to  another  group  of  people.  There  can  be  no universal test; there can be no exclusive test; there can be no conclusive  test. In  fact, it may be futile to apply and

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 106  

rigid tests.  One may  to look  at the  generality  and  the totality of the situation. [398 A-C]      4. Before  attempting to lay down any guideline for the purpose  of  determining  the  methods  to  be  adopted  for identifying the  socially and educationally backward classes one should  guard against  the pitfalls  of the  traditional approach to the question, which has generally been superior, elitist and,  therefore, ambivalent.  The result is that the claim of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes  to equality  as  a  matter  of  human  and constitutional right  is  forgotten  and  their  rights  are submerged  in   what  is   described  as  the  "Preferential principle" or  "protective or  compensatory discrimination". Unless these superior, patronising and paternalist attitudes are got  rid off.  It is  difficult to  truly appreciate the problems involved  in the  claim of  the  Scheduled  Castes, Scheduled  Tribes  and  other  backward  classes  for  their legitimate share  of  the  benefits  arising  out  of  their belonging to  humanity and  to a  country whose constitution preaches  justice,   social,  economic   and  political  and equality of status and opportunity for all. [393 E-H]      5.  There  is  neither  statistical  basis  nor  expert evidence to  support the  assumption  that  efficiency  will necessarily be  impaired  if  reservation  exceeds  50%,  if reservation is carried forward or if reservation is extended to promotional  posts.  The  word  ’efficiency’  is  neither sacro-sanct nor is the sanctorum has to be fiercely guarded. ’Efficiency’ is  not a Mantra which is whispered by the Guru in the  Sishya’s ear.  The mere securing of high marks at an examination  may   not   necessarily   mark   out   a   good administrator. An  efficient administrator,  one  takes  it, must be one who possesses among other qualities the capacity to  understand  with  sympathy  and,  therefore,  to  tackle bravely the  problems  of  a  large  segment  of  population constituting the  weaker sections  of the  people. This does not mean  that efficiency in civil service is unnecessary or that it  is a  myth. However, one need not make a fastidious fetish of  it. It  may be  that for  certain posts, only the best may  be appointed and for certain courses of study only the best  may be  admitted. If  so, rules  may  provide  for reservation for  appointment to such posts and for admission to such  courses. The  rules may  provide for an appropriate method of  selection. It may be that certain posts require a very high  degree of skill or efficiency and certain courses of study require a high degree of industry and intelligence. If so,  the rules  may prescribe  a high  minimum qualifying standard and  an appropriate  method of selection. Different minimum standards  and different  modes of  selection may be prescribed  for   different  posts   and  for  admission  to different courses of study having regard to the requirements of the  posts and  the courses  of  study.  But,  efficiency cannot be  permitted to  be used  as a camouflage to let the upper classes  monopolise  the  services,  particularly  the higher posts  and the  professional institutions. In view of Articles 15(4) and 16(4), the so called 363 controversy  between   the   moratorium   and   compensatory principles is not of any significance. [395 D; G-H; 396 C-G; 397 F]      6. The three dimensions of social inequality are class, status and  power. Everyone  of these  three dimensions  are intimately  and   inextricably   connected   with   economic position. Viewed  from any  of these  three dimensions it is clear  that   the  economic  factor  is  at  the  bottom  of backwardness and  poverty  is  the  culprit  cause  and  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 106  

dominant characteristic.  The economic  power has firm links with the  castes system,  land  and  learning,  two  of  the primary sources  of economic  power in  India have  been the monopoly of  the superior castes. Social status and economic power are so woven and fused into the caste system in Indian rural society  that one may, without hesitation, say that if poverty be  the cause,  caste is the primary index of social backwardness, so  that social  backwardness is often readily identifiable with  reference to  a  person’s  caste.  Shared situation  in   the  economic  hierarchy,  caste  gradation, occupation, habitation,  style of  consumption, standard  of literacy and a variety of such other factors appear to go to make towards  social and  educational backwardness.  [398 F; 399 C-H 400 G-H]      7. "  The backward  classes of citizens" referred to in Article 16(4),  despite the  short description, and the same as ’the  socially  and  educationally  backward  classes  of citizens and  the scheduled castes and the scheduled tribes’ so fully  described in  Article 15(4).  Again the  ’ special provision for  advancement’ is  a wide  expression  any  may include many  more things besides ’mere reservation of seats in colleges  It may  be by way of financial assistance, free medical, educational  and hostel  facilities,  scholarships, free transport, concessional or free housing, exemption from requirements insisted  upon in the case of other classes and so on.  Under Article  16(4), reservation  is to  be made to benefit those  backward classes,  who in  the opinion of the Government are  not adequately represented, in the services. Reservation must,  therefore, be  aimed at securing adequate representation.  It   must  follow   that  the   extent   of reservation must  match the  inadequacy  of  representation. There is  no reason  why this  guideline  furnished  by  the Constitution itself  should not  also  be  adopted  for  the purposes of  Article 15(4)  too. The reservation of seats in professional colleges  may conveniently  be determined  with reference to the inadequacy of representation in the various professions. Similarly,  the extent  of reservation in other colleges may  be determined with reference to the inadequacy in the  number of  graduates, etc.  Naturally, if  the  lost ground is  to be  gained, the extent of reservation may even have to be slightly higher than the percentage of population of the backward classes. [403 H; 404 A-F]      8. The  ordinary  rules  of  statutory  interpretations cannot be  applied to  interpret constitutional  instruments which are  sui generis  and which  deal with  situations  of significance and consequence. The Constitution must be given a generous  interpretation so  as to  give all its citizens, the full measure of justice promised by it. [406 D-E]      There is  no reason  whatever to  narrow the concept of equality in Article 16(1) and refuse to read into it broader concepts of  social justice  and equality.  In  fact  it  is necessary to  read Article  16(1) so as not to come into any conflict 364 with Articles  46 and 335. A constitutional document must be read  so   as  to   synthesise  its   provisions  and  avoid disharmony. To  say that equality means that unequals cannot be treated equally is merely to say what is self-evident and common place.  Article implies  it and  it is not implied in Article 16(1)  also. True,  on a first glance, Article 16(4) appears to save power of the State to make provision for the reservation of  appointments and  posts  in  favour  of  any backward class  of citizens, but a second look shows that it really recognises  a pre-existing  power and  expresses  the recognition in  an emphatic  way lest  there should  be  any

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 106  

doubt caste upon that power. Such a device is not unknown to legislatures and  constitution making  bodies. Article 16(4) is more  in the  nature of a rule of interpretation to guide the  construction  of  Article  16(1).  The  possibility  of interpreting Article  16(1) so  as to  promote the  narrower equality rather  than the  greater equality  is excluded  by Article 16(4). [425-CE]      9. The  test of nearness to the conditions of existence of  the  Scheduled  Castes  would  practically  nullify  the provision for  reservation for  socially  and  educationally Backward Classes  other then  Scheduled Castes  and  Tribes, would perpetuate  the dominance  of existing  upper classes, and would  take a  substantial majority  of the classes, who are between  the upper  classes and the Scheduled Castes and Tribes out  of the category of backward classes and put them at a  permanent disadvantage. Only the ’enlightened’ classes of body  will capture all the ’open’ posts and seats and the reserved posts and seats will go to the Scheduled Castes and Tribes and  those very the Scheduled Castes and Tribes. 1 he bulk of  these behind the ’enlightened’ classes and ahead of the near  Scheduled Castes and Tribes would be left high and dry, with  never a chance of improving themselves. [406 G-H; 407 A)      10. On  principle, there  can be a classification in to Backward Classes  and More Backward Classes, if both classes are not  merely a  little behind  but far  behind  the  most advanced classes.  In fact  such a  classification would  be necessary to held the More Backward Classes; otherwise those of the  Backward Classes who might be a little more advanced than the  More Backward Classes might walk away with all the seats, just  as, if  reservation was  confined to  the  More Backward Classes and no reservation was made to the slightly more advanced  Backward Classes,  the most  advanced Classes would walk away with all the seats available for the general category leaving none for the Backward Classes. [409 A-D]      11. As  to the  adoption of  the test  average  student population in the last three High School Classes of all High Schools in  the State  in relation to a thousand citizens of that  community   as  the   basis  for   assessing  relative backwardness, the adoption of a lower basis may give a false picture. After  all, if  one is  considering the question of admission to  professional colleges  or  of  appointment  to posts, the  basis possibly  should be  the average number of students of  that community  who have passed the examination prescribed as  the minimum  qualification for  admission  to professional colleges,  say in  the  last  three  years  and perhaps the  average number of persons of that community who have graduated  in the last three years, since graduation is generally, the  mini mum extent qualification for most posts possibly, the  extent of  reservation  may  even  vary  with reference to the class of post. [490 D-H] 365      12. The  percentage of reservation is not a matter upon which a Court may pronounce with no materials at hand. For a Court to  say that  reservations   should not  exceed 40 per cent, 50  per cent or 60 per cent would be arbitrary and the Constitution does not permit us to be arbitrary. [410 E-F]      13. From  the historical and sociological background of caste and  class the philosophy, the reason and the rhetoric behind reservation  and anti-reservation, the Constitutional provisions and  the varying  judicial stances, the following emerges; (a)  clearly there  exist large  sections of people who are socially and educationally backward who stand midway between the forward classes such as the landed, the learned, the priestly  and the  trading classes  on one  side and the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 106  

out-caste and  depressed classes,  i.e. the Scheduled Castes and the  Scheduled Tribes  on the  other;(b) Poverty, Caste, occupation and  habitation are  the principal  factors which contribute to  brand  a  class  as  socially  backward.  The customs which  they honour  and observe,  the rituals  which they fear  and practice  the habits  to which they adapt and conform, the  festivals which  they enjoy  and celebrate and even the  Gods that they revere and worship are enlightening elements  in   recognising  their   social   gradation   and backwardness; (c)  Amongst very many classes and communities considered socially  inferior, child  marriage persists, the rule of Saptapadi is not followed; divorces are granted by a caste panchayat;  (d) dress  and work  habit is  yet another indication that  economic  situation  and  social  situation often reflect each others; (e) there are many other customs, rituals or  habits of  significance mark  out  the  socially backward class;  (f) the  weight to  be  attached  to  these factors depends upon the circumstances of the case which can only be  revealed by  thoughtful, penetrating  investigation and analysis.  It cannot  be done  by means  of mathematical formulae but  only by  looking in the round or taking a look at the  entire situation.  Sometimes it  may be  possible to readily identify  certain castes or social groups as a whole as socially  forward or  socially backward classes. Poverty, of course,  is basic,  being the  root cause  as well as the rueful result  of social  and educational  backwardness  But mere  poverty   it  seems   is  not  enough  to  invite  the constitutional branding  because of the vast majority of the people of our country are poverty-struck but some among them are socially  and educationally forward and others backward. In a country like India where 80 per cent of the people live below the  breadline, even  the majority  of the  so  called socially forward  classes may  be poor.  In the rural social ladder they  are indeed  high up  and despite  the  economic backwardness of  sizeable sections  of them,  they cannot be branded as  socially backward.  On the other hand, there are several castes  or other  social groups  who have only to be named  to   be  immediately   identified  as   socially  and economically  backward   classes,  identified   as  socially backward classes. [431 F-H; 432 A-F; 433 A-E]      R. Chitralekha  v. State  of Mysore,  [1964] 6 SCR 368; Rajendran v.  State of  Madras,1968] I  SCR  721;  State  of Andhra Pradesh v. P. Sagar, [1968]3 SCR 595; Triloki Nath v. State  of   Jammu  &   Kashmir,  [1969]   1  SCR   103;   A. Peeriakaruppan v.  State of  Tamil Nadu.  1197]] 1  8CC  38; State of Andhra Pradesh v. Balram AIR 1972 SC 1375; State of Uttar Pradesh  v. Pradeep  Tandon 11975l  2  SCR  761;  X.S. Jayasree v.  State of  Kerala [1976]  3 SCC  730;  State  of Kerala v.  N.M. Thomas  [1976] I  SCR  906;  Akhil  Bhartiya Soshit Karamchari Sangh v Union of India & Ors. [1981] 1 SCR 185 referred to. 366 (g) True,  a few members of those caste or social groups may have progressed far enough and forged ahead so as to compare favourably with  the leading  forward classes  economically, socially and  educationally. In  such cases,  per  haps  and upper income ceiling would secure the benefit of reservation to such of these members of the class who really deserve it; (h) In the cases of poorest sections of the forward classes, the State  will have  to-and it  is the duty of the State to do-to discover  means of  assisting them  means  other  than reservations under Article 15(4) and 16(4). [433 G-H]      14. In  the ultimate  analysis, attainment  of economic equality is the final and the only solution to the besetting problems. There  is also  one danger  in adopting individual

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 15 of 106  

property as  the criterion  to  identify  a  member  of  the backward classes.  The truly  lower  classes  who  need  the certificate  most  to  prove  their  poverty  will  find  it difficult to  get the  certificate from  the official or the legislator or any named person [434 B-C]      15. Class poverty, not individual poverty, is therefore the primary test. Other ancillary tests are the way of life, the standard  of living,  the place in the social hierarchy, the  habits   and  customs,  etc.  etc.  Despite  individual exceptions, it  may be  possible and easy to identify social backwardness with  reference to  caste,  with  reference  to residence,  with  reference  to  occupation  or  some  other dominant feature. notwithstanding our antipathy to caste and sub-regionalism, these  are facts  of life  which cannot  be wished away.  If they  reflect poverty  which is the primary source of  social and educational backwardness, they must be recognised for  what they  are along with other less primary sources.  There  is  and  there  can  be  nothing  wrong  in recognising  poverty   wherever  it   is  reflected   as  an identifiable group  phenomena whether  you see it as a caste group, a  sub regional  group, an occupational group or some other class.  Once  the  relevant  factors  are  taken  into consideration, how  and where to draw the line is a question for each  State to  consider since  the economic  and social conditions differ  from area  to  area.  Once  the  relevant conditions are taken into consideration and the backwardness of a  class of  people is determined, it will not be for the court to  interfere in  the matter.  But certainly, judicial review will not stand excluded. [334 D-G] Per A.P. Sen, J.        1. Conceptually, the making of special provisions for the advancement  of backward  classes of citizens under Art. 15(4) and the system of reservation of appointments or posts as  envisaged   by  Art.   16(4)  as   guaranteed   in   the Constitution, is a national commitment and a historical need to eradicate  age-old social disparities in our country. But unfortunately the policy of reservation higher to formulated by the  Government for  the upliftment  of such socially and educationally backward classes of citizens is caste-oriented while the  policy should be based on economic criteria. Then alone the element of caste in making such special provisions or reservations  under Arts. 15(4) and 16(4) can be removed. [435B-D]      2. It is true that mere economic backwardness would not satisfy the  rest of  educational  and  social  backwardness under Article 15(4), and is only 367 One of  several tests to be adopted. The predominant and the only factor  for making  special  provisions  under  Article 15(4) or  for reservations  of posts  and appointments under Art. 16(4)  should be poverty, and caste or a sub-caste or a group should  be used only for purposes of identification of persons comparable  to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, till such  members of  backward classes  attain a  state  of enlightenment and  there is  eradication of  poverty amongst them and they become equal partners in a new social order in our national life. [435 H; 436 C-D]      3. The  adequacy or  otherwise of representation of the backward classes  in the  services has to be determined with reference to  the percentage of that class in the population and the  total strength  of the  service  as  a  whole.  The representation does  not have  to exactly  correspond to the percentage of  that class  in the population; it just has to be adequate. Moreover, in the case of services the extent of representation has  to be  considered by taking into account

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 16 of 106  

the number  of members of that class in the service, whether they are holding reserved or unreserved posts. [436 E-F]      4. The  State should  give due importance and effect to the  dual   constitutional  mandates   of   maintenance   of efficiency and  the equality of opportunity for all persons. The nature  and extent  of reservations must be rational and reasonable. The  state  of  backwardness  of  any  class  of citizens is  a fact  situation which needs investigation and determination by a fact finding body which has the expertise and  the   machinery  for   collecting  relevant  data.  The Constitution has  provided for  the appointment  of  such  a Commission for  Backward Classes by the President under Art. 340 to  make recommendations  and left  if to  the States to make special  provisions for  advancement of  such  backward classes. It may be, and often is, difficult for the Court to draw the line in advance which the State ought not to cross, but it  is never  difficult for  the Court  to know  that an invasion across  the border,  however ill-defined, has taken place.  The  Courts  have  neither  the  expertise  nor  the sociological knowledge  to define  or lay  down the criteria for  determining   what  are   ’socially  and  educationally backward classes  of citizens’  within the  meaning of  Art. 15(4) which  enables the  State to  make ’special provisions for the  advancement’ of  such classes  notwithstanding  the command of  Art. 15(2) that the State shall not discriminate against any  citizens on  the ground only of religion, race, caste, descent,  place of  birth, residence  or any of them. The Supreme  Court is  ill-equipped to  perform the  task of determining whether  a class  of citizens  is  socially  and educationally backward, but, however a duty to interpret the Constitution and  to see  what it  means and intends when it makes  provision   for  the   advancement  of  socially  and educationally  backward   classes.   In   considering   this situation then,  Courts must  never forget  that it  is  the Constitution they are expounding. Except for this, the Court has very little or no function.                                           [436 G-H; 437 A-D]      5. The  Preamble to our Constitution shows the nation’s resolve to  secure  to  all  its  citizens:  Justice-Social, economic and  political. The  State’s objective  of bringing about  and  maintaining  social  justice  must  be  achieved reasonably having regard to the interests of all. Irrational and unreasonable  moves by  the State will slowly but surely tear apart the fabric of society. It is primarily the 368 duty and function of the state to inject moderation into the decisions taken    under  Arts.  15(4)  and  16(4),  because justice lives  in the  hearts of  men and a growing sense of injustice and reverse discrimination, fueled by unwise State action, will  destroy, not  advance, social  justice. If the State contravenes  the constitutional mandates of Art. 16(1) and Art.  335, the  Supreme Court  will of  course, have  to perform its duty. [437 F-G]      6. The  extent of reservation under Art. 15(4) and Art. 16(4) must  necessarily vary  from State  to State  and from region  to   region  within  a  State,  depending  upon  the conditions prevailing  in a  particular State  or region, of the Backward  Classes.  Since  the  problems  pertaining  in reservation can  never be resolved through litigation in the Courts,  the   Central  Government   should   consider   the feasibility of  appointing a  permanent National  Commission for  Backward   Classes  which  must  constantly  carry  out sociological and economic study from State to State and from region  to  region  within  a  State.  The  framers  of  the Constitution by  enacting Art.  340  clearly  envisaged  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 17 of 106  

setting up  of such  a high-powered  National Commission for Backward Classes at the Centre. [437 H; 438 A-B]      7. The  doctrine of  protective discrimination embodied in Arts.  15(4) and  16(4) and  the mandate  of  Art.  29(2) cannot be  stretched beyond  a particular  limit. The  State exists to  serve its  people. There  are some services where expertise and  skill are  of the  essence. Medical  services directly affect  and deal  with the  health and  life of the populace. Professional  expertise,  born  of  knowledge  and experience, of  a high  degree of  technical  knowledge  and operational  skill   is  required  of  pilots  and  aviation engineers. The  lives of  citizens depend  on such  persons. There are  other similar  fields  of  governmental  activity where  professional,   technological,  scientific  or  other special skill is called for. In such services or posts under the Union or States, there can be no room for reservation of posts;  merit   alone  must   be  the   sole  and   decisive consideration for appointments. [438 C-E] Per Venkataramiah, J.      1. Equality of opportunity revolves around two dominant principles-  (i)   the  traditional  value  of  equality  of opportunity;  and   (ii)  the  newly  appreciated-not  newly conceived-idea of  equality of  results. The  Society  which cherishes the  ideal of  equality has  to define the meaning and consent  of the concept of equality and the choices open to it  to bring about an egalitarian society would always be political. But  the Courts  have been forced to scrutinise a variety of  choices, while  society for  which they  have to answer has  been issuing  a proliferation  of demands.  Many inequalities in  the past seemed almost to have been part of the order  of nature.  The Courts,  however  deal  with  the problems that  society presents.  ‘Levels of  awareness  and corresponding senses  of grievance  have arisen at different times for  particular historical  reasons often  tending  to differentiate among  the categories  of equality rather than unifying them. Inequalities of class, race, religion and sex have presented  themselves at  different periods  as primary grievances’. The  Courts must  remind  themselves  that  for those who  are suffering  from  deprivation  of  inalienable rights, gradualism can never be a sufficient remedy. Ours is a ’struggle for status, a struggle 369 to take  democracy off  parchment and give it life.’ ’Social injustice always  balances its  books with red ink’. Neither the caprice  of personal  taste nor the protection of vested interests can stand as reasons for restricting opportunities of  any   appropriately  qualified  person.  These  are  the considerations  which  sometimes  may  be  conflicting  that should weigh  with  the  courts  while  dealing  with  cases arising out of the doctrine of equality. It should, however, be remembered  that the  courts by  themselves are  not in a position to  bring the  concept of  equality  into  fruitful action. They  should be  supported by the will of the people of the Government and of the legislators. These should be an emergence of  united action  on the  part of all segments of human society.  This is  not all.  Mere will  to bring about equality under  the existing economic level might worsen the situation. There  should be at the same time a united action to increase  the national resources so that the operation of equality will  be less  burdensome and  every member  of the society is  carried to  a higher  social and  economic level leaving nobody  below a  minimum which  guarantees  all  the basic human  needs to  every member of the society. If there is no  united action  the  pronouncements  by  courts  would become  empty   words  as   many  of   the  high  principles

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 18 of 106  

adumberated in  the chapter  on the  Directive Principles of State Policy in the Constitution have turned out to be owing to several factors. [440 B-H; 441 A]      2. The  need for  social action  is necessitated by the environmental  factors   and  living   conditions   of   the individuals concerned.  The application  of the principle of individual merit,  unmitigated by  other considerations  may quite often lead to inhuman results 1441 G]      3. An  examination of the question of the background of the Indian  Social conditions-caste  ridden atmosphere shows that  the   expression  "backward   classes"  used   in  the Constitution  referred  only  to  those  who  were  born  in particular castes,  or who  belonged to  particular races or tribes or  religious minorities which were backward. This is so because a caste is based on various factors, sometimes it may be  a class,  a race or a racial unit and the caste of a person is  governed by his birth in. the family. [459 E; 457 F]      It  is   significant  that   the  expression  "backward classes" used  in  Part  XVI  of  the  Constitution  and  in particular  in   Article  338(3)  is  used  along  with  the Scheduled Castes,  the Scheduled Tribes and the Anglo-Indian Community. The meaning of "backward classes" has, therefore, to be  deduced along with the other words preceding it. [462 G]      It is a rule of statutory construction that where there are general  words following  particular and specific words, the general  words must  be confined  to things  of the same kind as  those specified. It is true that this rule which is called as  the ejusdem  generise rule or the rule noscitur a sociis cannot  be carried  too far.  But it is reasonable to apply that rule where the specific words refer to a distinct genus or category. [462 H; 463 A]      Part  XVI   of  the  Constitution  deals  with  certain concessions extended  to certain  castes, tribes  and  races which are  Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled Tribes and to the Anglo-Indian community. In the context if Article 338(3) and 370 Article 340 are construed, the expression ’backward classes’ can  only  refer  to  A  certain  castes,  races  tribes  or communities or  parts thereof  other than  Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes  and the  Anglo-Indian community, which are backward. Clause  (6) of  the resolution  regarding the aims and objects  of the  Constitution moved by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru on  December 13, 1946 and the history of the enactment of Part  XVI of the Constitution by the Constituent Assembly lead to  the conclusion that backward classes are only those castes, races,  tribes or  communities, which are identified by birth,  which are backward. It is, therefore,difficult to hold that  persons or  groups of  persons who  are  backward merely on  account of poverty which is traceable to economic reasons can  also be  considered  as  backward  classes  for purposes of  Article 16(4) and Part XVI of the Constitution. [463 C-D; 466 G-H]      The Drafting  Committee by  qualifying  the  expression "class of  citizens" by  "backward" in  Article 16(4) of the Constitution tried  to reconcile  three different  points of view  and   produced  a   workable  proposition   which  was acceptable to  all, the  three points of view being (i) that there should be equality of opportunity for all citizens and that every individual qualified for a particular post should be free  to apply  for that post to sit for examinations and to have his qualifications tested so as to determine whether he was fit for the post or not and that there ought to be no limitations, there ought to be no hindrance in the operation

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 19 of 106  

of the  principle of  equality of  opportunity; (ii) that if the principle of equality of opportunity was to be operative there ought  to be no reservations of any sort for any class or community  all and  that all  citizens if  they qualified should be  placed on  the same footing of equality as far as public services  were concerned;  and (iii)  that though the principle of  equality of opportunity was theoretically good there must  at the  same time  be a  provision made  for the entry of  certain communities which have so far been outside the administration.  The whole  tenor of  discussion in  the Constituent Assembly  pointed to  making reservation  for  a minority of  the population  including Scheduled  Castes and Scheduled Tribes which were socially backward. [465 G-H; 466 A-B]      4. In  Balaji’s case  and in  Chitralekha’s  case,  the Supreme Court  exhibited a lot of hesitation in equating the expression ’class’  with ’caste’  for  purposes  of  Article 15(4) and  16(4) of  the Constitution.  The juxtaposition of the expression  ’backward classes’ and ’Scheduled Castes’ in Article 15  of the  Constitution, according to the above two decisions, led  to a  reasonable inference  that  expression ’classes’ was  not synonymous  with ’caste’. The Court while making these  observations did  not give adequate importance to  the   evils  of  caste  system  which  had  led  to  the backwardness of  people belonging  to certain castes and the debates that  preceded the enactment of Part XVI and Article 15(4) and  Article 16(4)  of the  Constitution. What  was in fact over  looked was  the  history  of  the  Indian  social institutions. The  makers of  the Indian  Constitution  very well knew  that there were a number of castes the conditions of whose  members were  almost similar  to the conditions of members  belonging  to  the  Scheduled  Castes  and  to  the Scheduled Tribes  and that  they also  needed  to  be  given adequate protection  in order  to tide over the difficulties in the  way of  their progress which were not so much due to poverty but  due to  their birth in a particular caste. Part XVI was not enacted for the 371 purpose of  alleviating the  conditions of poorer classes as such which  was taken care of by the provision of Part IV of the Constitution  and in  particular by  Article 46  and  by Article  14,   Article  15(1)   and  Article  16(1)  of  the Constitution which  permitted classification  of persons  on economic grounds  for special  treatment in  order to ensure equality of  opportunity to  all persons The views expressed by the  Supreme Court,  however stood  modified by the later decisions. [466- D-H; 467 A-B]      Minor P.  Rajendran v.  State of Madras & Ors. [19681 2 SCR 786; State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr. v. P. Sagar [1968] 3 SCR 595;  Triloki Nath  & Anr. v. State of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors. [19691  I SCR  103; A.  Peeriakaruppan etc. v. State of Tamil Nadu  & Ors. 11971] 2 SCR 430; State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. v. U.S.V. Balram etc. [1972]  3 SCR 247 referred to.      5. If  the view that caste or community is an important relevant  factor   in  determining  social  and  educational backwardnesses for  purposes of  Articles ]5(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution,  is departed  from several distortions are likely to follow and may take away from the sole purpose for which these  constitutional provisions were enacted. Several factors such  as  physical  disability,  poverty,  place  of habitation, the  fact of  belonging to  a freedom  fighter’s family, the  fact of  belonging to the family of a member of the armed  forces might  each become  a sole  factor for the purpose of  Article 15(4) or Article 16(4) which were not at all intended  to be resorted to by the State for the purpose

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 20 of 106  

of granting  relief in such cases. While relief may be given in such  cases under  Article 15(1)  and  Article  16(1)  by adopting a rational principle of classification, Article 14, Article 15(4)  and Article  16(4) cannot be applied to them. Article 15(4) and Article 16(4) are intended for the benefit of  those   who  belong   to  castes/communities  which  ale ’traditionally disfavoured  and which have suffered societal discriminations’ in  the past.  The other  factors mentioned above were  never in  the contemplation of the makers of the Constitution while enacting these clauses. [472 A-D]      D.N. Chanchala  v. State  of Mysore  & Ors. etc. [1971] Supp. SCR 608; State of Kerala v. Kumari T.P. Roshana & Anr. [1979] 2  SCR 974;  Kumari M.S.  Jayasree & Anr. v. State of Kerala &  Anr. [1977]  1 SCR  ]94; State of Uttar Pradesh v. Pradip Tandon  & Ors.  (1975) 2  SCR 761; Subhash Chandra v. The State  of U.P.  & Ors. AIR 1973 All. 295; Dilip Kumar v. The Government of U.P. & Ors. AIR 1973 All. 592 referred to.      6. Article  14 of  the  Constitution  consists  of  two parts. It  asks the State not to deny to any person equality before law.  It also  asks the  State not  to deny the equal protection of the laws. Equality before law connotes absence of  any   discrimination  in   law.  The  concept  of  equal protection required  the  State  to  meet  out  differential treatment to  persons in  different situations  in order  to establish an  equilibrium amongst  all. This is the basis of the rule  that equals should be treated equally and unequals must be  treated unequally if the doctrine of equality which is one  of the  corner stones  of our  Constitution is to be duly implemented.  In order  to do justice amongst unequals, the State  has  to  resort  to  compensatory  or  protective discrimination. Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution were enacted as measures of compensatory or protective 372 discrimination to  grant  relief  to  persons  belonging  to socially oppressed  castes and minorities. Under them, it is possible to  provide for reservation of seats in educational institution and  of posts  in Government  services  to  such persons only.  But if there are persons who do not belong to socially oppressed  castes and  minorities but who otherwise belong  to   weaker  sections,  due  to  poverty,  place  of habitation, want  of equal  opportunity  etc.  the  question arises whether  such reservation can be made in their favour under any  other  provision  of  the  Constitution  such  as Article 14,  Article 15(1),  Article 16(1)  or  Article  46. According to  Thomas’s case, (a) no reservation of posts can be  made   in  Government   services  for  backward  classes including  Scheduled   Castes  and  Scheduled  Tribes  under Article 14  or Article 16 1), and (b) preferential treatment as was  done in  this case  on the  basis of  classification ordinarily  could  be  given  under  Article  16(1)  to  the Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled  Tribes only. Other backward classes could  not, except  in exceptionally  rare cases  be extended the  same benefit  and their  only hope was Article 16(4) of the Constitution. [477 A-E; 485 G-H]      7.  As   to  the   power  of  the  Government  to  make reservations  under   Article  15(4)   and  16(4)   of   the Constitution: The  determination of the question whether the members belonging  to a  caste or a group or a community are backward for  the purpose of Article 15(4) and Article 16(4) of the  Constitution is  not open  to the Government to call any caste or group or community as backward according to its sweet will  and pleasure  and extend the benefit that may be granted under  those provisions  to such  caste or  group or community.  The   exercise  of  uncontrolled  power  by  the Government in  this regard  may lead to political favoritism

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 21 of 106  

leading to  denial of the just requirements of classes which are truly  backward. The power of the Government to classify any caste  or group  or community  as  backward  has  to  be exercised in  accordance with  the guidelines  that  can  be easily gathered  from the  Constitution. It  is now accepted that the  expressions ’socially  and educationally  backward classes of  citizens’  and  the  Scheduled  Castes  and  the Scheduled Tribes’  in  Article  15(4)  of  the  Constitution together are equivalent to ‘backward classes of citizens’ in Article 16(4). [486 A-D]      Further the  criterion for determining the backwardness must not  be based  solely on  religion, race, caste, sex or place  of  birth  and  the  backwardness  being  social  and educational must  be similar  to the backwardness from which the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes suffered. This view is in conformity with the intention underlying clause 6 of the  resolution regarding  the aims  and objects  of  the Constitution moved  by Jawaharlal  Nehru on December 13,1946 which  asked   the  Constitution   Assembly   to   frame   a Constitution providing  adequate safeguards  for minorities, backward and  tribal area  and depressed  and other backward classes and  also wish  the provisions  of Article  338  and Article  340   of  the   Constitution.  Unless   the   above restriction is  imposed on  the Government,  it would become possible for  the Government  to call  any caste or group or community which  constitutes a  powerful political  lobby in the State  as backward  even though  in fact  it may  be  an advanced caste  or group  or community  but just  below some other forward community.                                             [486 H; 487 C-D] 373      There is  another important  reason why  such  advanced castes or  groups or  communities should  not be included in the list of backward classes and that A is that if castes or groups and  communities which  are fairly  well advanced and castes and  groups and communities which are really backward being at  the rock-bottom  level are  classified together as backward  classes,   the  benefit   of   reservation   would invariably be eaten up by the more advanced sections and the really deserving  sections would  practically go without any benefit as  more number  of children  of the  more  advanced castes or  group or  communities  amongst  them  would  have scored higher  marks than  the  children  of  more  backward castes or  groups or  communities. In  that even  the  whole object of reservation would become frustrated. [487 D-F]      Hence as  far as  possible while  preparing the list of backward classes,  the State  Government has to bear in mind the above principle as a guiding factor. The adoption of the above principle will not unduly reduce the number of persons who will  be eligible  for the  benefits under Article 15(4) and Article  16(4) of  the Constitution since over the years the level  of the  Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled Tribes is also going  up by  reason of several remedial measures taken in regard  to them  by the  State and Central Government. At the same  time, it  will also  release the  really  backward castes, groups  and communities  from the  strangle-hold  of many advanced  groups  which  have  l-ad  the  advantage  of reservation along  with  the  really  backward  classes  for nearly three  decades. It  is time  that n  ore attention is given to  those castes, groups and communities who have been at the lowest level suffering from all the disadvantages and disabilities (except  perhaps untouchability)  to which many of the  Scheduled Castes  and  Scheduled  Tribes  have  been exposed but without the same or similar advantages that flow from being  included in the list of the Scheduled Castes and

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 22 of 106  

the Scheduled Tribes.                                             [487 H; 488 A-B]      Janki Prasad Parimoo & Ors. etc. etc. v. State of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors. [1973l 3 SCR 236 referred to.      8.  Since   economic  condition   is  also  a  relevant criterion, it  would be  appropriate to incorporate a ’means test’ as one of the tests in determining the backwardness as was done  by the  Kerala Government. These two tests namely, that the conditions of caste or group or community should be more  or  less  similar  to  the  conditions  in  which  the Scheduled Castes  or Scheduled  Tribes are situated and that the income of the family to which the candidate belongs does not  exceed  the  specified  limit  would  serve  as  useful criteria in  determining beneficiaries of any reservation to be made  under Article  15(4). For  the purpose  of  Article 16(4) however,  it should  also be  shown that  the backward class in  question is  in the  opinion of the Government not adequately represented  in the  Government services. [488 C- i]      9. The  classification styled  as ’special’ group which is based  on occupation-cum-income  considerations and which has received  the approval  in Chitralekha  s case;  is  yet another valid  and useful  test which can be adopted for the purpose of reservation which can be more legitimately traced to Art. 14 and not to Art. 15(4) and Art. 16(4). [491 H] 374      10. From  a careful  consideration  of  all  the  seven opinions in  the A  Thomas s case it cannot be said that the settled view of the Supreme Court that the reservation under Article 15(4) or Article 16(4) could not be more than 50 per cent has  been unsettled  by a  majority on  the Bench which decided this case. [491 B]      11. If  reservation is  made only  in favour  of  those backward castes  or clauses  which  are  comparable  to  the Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled Tribes, it may not exceed 50 per cent  (including 18  per cent reserved for the Scheduled Castes and  Scheduled Tribes  and 15  per cent  reserved for ’special group’)  in view  of the  total population  of such backward classes  in the  State of  Karnataka.  The  Havanur Commission has  taken the number of students passing at SSLC examination in  the year  1972 as  the basis for determining the backwardness.  The average  passes per  thousand of  the total population of the State of Karnataka was 1.69 in 1972. The average in the case of the Scheduled Castes was 0.56 and in the  case of  Scheduled Tribes  was 0.51. Even if we take all the  castes, tribes  and communities  whose  average  is below 50  per cent  of the  State average  i.e. below 85 per cent for  classifying them  as  backward,  large  chunks  of population which  are now  treated as backward would have to go out  of the  list of  backward classes.  Consequently the necessity  for   reservation  which  would  take  the  total reservation under  Article 15(4)  and 1(,(4)  beyond 50  per cent of  the total  number of  seats/posts  would  cease  to exist. The present arrangement has been worked for more than five years  already. It  is now necessary to redetermine the question of  backwardness of  the various castes, tribes and communities for  purposes of Article 15(4) and Article 16(4) in the  light of  the latest  figures to be collected on the various  relevant   factors  and  to  refix  the  extent  of reservation for backward classes. The reservation of 15% now made under  Article 15(4) and Article 16(4) but which may be traced to  Articles 14 and 16(1) to ’special group’ based on occupation-cum-income can  in any  event be  availed  of  by members of all communities and castes.                                                    [491 C-G]

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 23 of 106  

    12. However, it should be made clear that if on a fresh determination some  castes or  communities have to go out of the list of backward classes prepared for Articles 15(4) and 16(4),  the  Government  may  still  pursue  the  policy  of amelioration of  weaker sections  of the  population amongst them in accordance with the directive principle contained in Article 46  of the Constitution. There are in all castes and communities poor  people who  if  they  are  given  adequate opportunity and  training may  be able  to  compete  success fully  with   persons  belonging   to  richer  classes.  The Government  may   provide  for   them  liberal   grants   of scholarships, free  studentships, free  boarding and lodging facilities, free  uniforms, free  mid-day meals etc. to make the life  of poor  students comfortable.  The Government may also provide extra tutorial facilities, stationery and books free of  cost and  library facilities. These and other steps should be  taken in  the lower classes so that by the time a student appears  for the  qualifying examination  he may  be able to  attain a high degree of proficiency in his studies. [491 H; 492 A-C] ^

&      ORIGINAL JURISDICTION:  Writ  Petitions  NOS.  1297-98, 1407 of 1979, 4995-97 of 1980 and 402 of 1981. 375       (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.)       F.S. Nariman, K.N. Bhat, B. Veerbhadrappa, H.S. Renuka Prasad, Vijay Kumar Verma, Nanjappa Ganpathy and P.K Manohar for the Petitioners in W.P. Nos. 1297-98, of 1979.      K Chennabasappa,  S.S. Javali  and B.R. Agarwal for the Petitioners in W.P. No. 1407 of 1979.      K.K Venugopal and C.S. Vaidyanathan for the Petitioners in W.P. Nos. 4995-97180 & 402 of 1981.      R.K. Garg  and A.V. Rangam, for the Respondents in W.P. Nos. 4995-97180 and 402 of 1981.      P.H. Parekh and Gautam Philip, for the Intervener Akhil Bharat Anusuchit Jati in W.P. Nos. 1297-98 of 1979. L3        L.G. Havenur, K.M.K. Nair and Narayana Nettar for the Intervener President  Karnataka Legislative in W.P. No. 1407 of 1979.        K  Rajendra  Chaudhury  for  the  Intervener  Dravida Kazhagam in W.P. No. 402 of 1981.      KM.K. Nair for the Intervener All India Nayaka Sangh in W.P. No. 1297-98 and 1407 of 1979.      The following Judgments were delivered:      CHANDRACHUD, C.J.  : My learned Brethren have expressed their  respective   points  of   view  on   the  policy   of reservations which,  alas, is  even figuratively,  a burning issue to-day.  We were invited by the counsel not so much as to deliver judgments but to express our opinion on the issue of reservations;  which may  serve as  a  guideline  to  the Commission with  the Government  of  Karnataka  proposes  to appoint, for  examining the  question  of  affording  better employment  and   educational  opportunities   to  Scheduled Castes, Scheduled  Tribes  and  other  Backward  Classes.  A somewhat unusual  exercise is  being undertaken by the Court in giving  expression to  its  views  without  reference  to specific facts.  But, institutions  profit  by  well-meaning innovations. The facts will appear before the Commission and it 376 will evolve  suitable tests in the matter of reservations. I

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 24 of 106  

cannot resist expressing the hope that the deep thinking and sincerity  which  has  gone  into  the  formulation  of  the opinions expressed by my learned Brethren will not go waste. The proposed Commission should give its close application to their weighty  opinions. Mine  is only  a skeletal effort. I reserve the  right to  elaborate upon it, but the chances of doing so are not too bright.      I would  state my opinion in the shape of the following pro positions:      1    The reservation  in favour of scheduled castes and      scheduled tribes must continue as at present, there is,      without the  application of a means test, for a further      period not  exceeding fifteen  years.  Another  fifteen      years will  make it fifty years after the advent of the      Constitution, a  period reasonably  long for  the upper      crust of  the oppressed classes to overcome the baneful      effects   of    social   oppression,    isolation   and      humiliation.      2.   The means  test, that  is  to  say,  the  test  of      economic backwardness  ought to be made applicable even      to the  Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes after the      period mentioned in (1) above. It is essential that the      privileged  section   of  the  underprivileged  society      should not  be  permitted  to  monopolise  preferential      benefits for an indefinite period of time.      3.   In so  far  as  the  Other  Backward  Classes  are      concerned, two  tests should  be conjunctively  applied      for identifying them for the purpose of reservations in      employment and  education: One,  that  they  should  be      comparable to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes      in the matter of their backwardness; and two, that they      should  satisfy   the  means   test  such  as  a  State      Government may  lay down  in the  context of prevailing      economic conditions.      4.   The  policy   of   reservations   in   employment,      education  and   legislative  institutions   should  be      reviewed every  five years  or so.  That will  at  once      afford an oppor 377      tunity (i)  to the State to rectify distortions arising      out of  particular facets of the reservation policy and      (ii) to  the people, both backward and non-backward, to      ventilate  their  views  in  a  public  debate  on  the      practical impact of the policy of reservations.        DESAI, J ‘India embraced equality as a cardinal value against a  background  of  elaborate,  valued,  and  clearly perceived inequalities.’(l) ’Art. 14 guaranteed equality but the awareness  of deep  rooted  inequality  in  the  society reflected in  Art. 15  and 16. Fifteen months of the working of the Constitution necessitated amplification of Art. 15(3) so as  to ensure  that any special provisions that the State may make for the educational, economic or social advancement of any  backward class citizen, may not be challenged on the ground of being discriminatory.’(‘2) Sec. 2 thereof provided for addition to sub Art (4) of Art. 15 For a period of three and a  half decades,  the unending  search  for  identifying socially and  educationally backward classes of citizens has defied the  policy makers, the interpreters of the policy as reflected in statutes or executive/administrative orders and has added  a spurt  in the  reverse direction, namely, those who  attempted  to  move  upward/(Pratilom)  in  the  social hierarchy have  put the  movement in  reverse gear  so as to move downwards (Anulom) in order to be identified as a group or class of citizens socially and educationally backward. As the  awareness   of  concessions  and  benefits  grows  with

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 25 of 106  

consequent frustration  on account of their non-availability confrontation develops  amongst various  classes of society. The Constitution  promised an  egalitarian society.  At  the dawn of  independence Indian Society was a compartmentalised society comprising  groups having  distinct and diverse life styles.  It  was  a  caste  ridden  stratified  hierarchical society. Though  this is well accepted, the concept of caste has defied  a coherent definition at the hands of jurists or sociologists.      Tn  the   early  stages   of  the  functioning  of  the Constitution, it  was accepted  without dissent  or dialogue that caste  furnishes a  working criterion  for  identifying socially and  educationally backward  class of  citizens for the purpose of Art. 15(4).      ’This was  predicated on  a  realistic  appraisal  that caste as  a principle  of social  order has  persisted  over millennia if much more (1) Marc Galanter-Competing Equalities 1980. (2) Objects and Reasons Statement of the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951. 378 disorderly and asymmetrical in practice than classical Hindu socio- legal  theory depicted it’.(1) Language of Art. 15(4) refers to  ’class’ and  not  caste.  Preferential  treatment which cannot  be struck  down as  discriminatory was  to  be accorded/to a  class, shown to be socially and educationally backward and  not to  the members  of a  caste  who  may  be presumed to  be socially  and educationally backward. How do we define,  ignoring the  caste  label,  class  of  citizens socially and  educationally backward.  As we are not writing on a  clean slate,  let us  look at judicial intervention to give shape  and form  to this concept of a class of citizens who are  socially and  educationally backward so as to merit preferred  treatment   or  compensatory   discrimination  or affirmative action.      A brief  survey of  decisions bearing  on  the  subject would reveal the confusion and the present state of malaise. This review  is necessary  because a  serious doubt  is  now nagging the jurists, the sociologists and the administrators whether caste  should be  the basis  for    recognising  the backwardness. There has been some vacillation on the part of the Judiciary  on the  question whether  the caste should be the basis  for recognising  the backwardness.  Therefore,  a bird’s eye-view  of the  decisions of the Court may first be taken to arrive at a starting point as to  whether  the Judiciary  has univocally  recognised caste as the basis for recognition of the backwardness,      In State  of Madras  v. Srimathi Champakam Dorairajan & Anr.,(2) this  Court struck  down the  classification in the Communal G.O.  founded on the basis of religion and caste on the ground  that it  is  opposed  to  the  Constitution  and constitutes a  clear violation  of  the  fundamental  rights guaranteed to  the citizen.  The decision was in the hey-day of supremacy of fundamental rights over Directive Principles of State Policy. The Court held that Art. 46 cannot override the  provisions   of  Art.   29(2)  because   the  Directive Principles of  State Policy  have to  conform to  and run as subsidiary to the Chapter of Fundamental Rights.      In M.R.  Balji &  Ors. v.  State of  Mysore(3)  it  was observed that  though caste  in relation  to Hindus may be a relevant factor to (1) Hutton-Caste  in India:  Its nature, function and Origin 1961. (2) [1951] S.C.R. 525. (3) [1963] Supp. I S.C.R. 439.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 26 of 106  

379 consider in determining the social backwardness of groups or classes of  citizens, it cannot be made the sole or dominant test. Social  A backwardness is in the ultimate analysis the result of  poverty to  a very  large extent.  The classes of citizens  who   are  deplorably  poor  automatically  become socially  backward.  The  problem  of  determining  who  are socially backward  classes, is undoubtedly very complex, but the classification  of socially  backward  citizens  on  the basis of  their castes  alone is  not permissible under Art. 15(4). The  Court could foresee the danger in treating caste as the sole criterion for determining social and educational backwardness.  The   importance  of  the  judgment  lies  in realistically appraising  the situation  when it uttered the harsh but  unquestionable truth  that economic  backwardness would provide a much more reliable yardstick for determining social   backwardness   because   more   often   educational backwardness is  the outcome  of  social  backwardness.  The Court drew  clear distinction  between ’caste’  and ’class’. The attempt  at finding  a new basis for ascertaining social and educational  backwardness in place of caste reflected in this decision.  Clairvoyance in this behalf displayed in our opinion is praiseworthy.      In T.  Devadesan v.  The Union  of India  & Anr.(l) the petitioner challenged  the carry  forward rule in the matter of reserved  seats in  the Central  Secretariat  Service  as being violative  of Art.  14 and 16 of the Constitution. The majority accepting the petition observed that the problem of giving adequate  representation to  members of  the backward class enjoined  by Art.  16(4) of  the Constitution  is  not adequate by  framing a  general rule without bearing in mind its reflections  from year  to  year.  What  precise  method should be  adopted for  this purpose  is a  matter  for  the Government to  decide. The Court observed that any method to be evolved  by  the  Government  must  strike  a  reasonable balance between the claims of the backwardness and claims of other employees as pointed out in Balaji s case.      In R.  Chitralekha &  Anr. v. State of Mysore & Ors.(2) the majority held valid the orders made by the Government of Mysore in  respect of  admissions to engineering and Medical Colleges, and  observed that  a classification  of  backward classes based  on economic conditions and occupations is not bad and does not offend Art. 15(4). (1) [1964] 4 S.C.R. 680. (2) [1964] 6 S.C.R. 368. 380 The  caste  of  a  group  of  citizens  may  be  a  relevant circumstance in A ascertaining their social backwardness and though  it   is  a   relevant  factor  to  determine  social backwardness of  a class,  it cannot be the sole or dominant test in  that behalf.  If in  a  given  situation  caste  is excluded in  ascertaining a class within the meaning of Art. 15(4) it does not vitiate the classification if it satisfied other tests.  The Court  observed that various provisions of the Constitution  which recognised  the factual existence of backwardness in the country and which make a sincere attempt to promote the welfare of the weaker sections thereof should be construed  to effectuate  that policy  and  not  to  give weightage to  progressive sections  of the society under the false colour  of caste to which they happen to belong. Under no  circumstances   a    ’caste’  though  the  caste  of  an individual or  group of individuals may be a relevant factor in putting him in a particular class.      In Triloki  Nath &  Anr. v.  State Or Jammu & Kashmir & Ors.(1) reservation of 5() per cent of the Gazetted posts to

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 27 of 106  

be filled  by promotion  was in favour of Muslims of Jammu & Kashmir. The  Court held  that inadequate  representation in State services  would not  be decisive  for determining  the backwardness of  the section.  The Court  accordingly,  gave directions for  collecting further  material relevant  to be subject.  After   the  material   as  directed  earlier  was collected the  matter was  placed before  the court  and the decision is  reported in  Triloki Nath  & Anr.  v. State  of Jammu &  Kashmir &  Ors.(1)  The  Court  observed  that  the expression ’backward  class’ is  not used as synonymous with ’backward caste’  or ’backward community’. The members of an entire caste  or community  may, in the social, economic and educational scale of values at a given time, be backward and may, on  that account  be treated  as a  backward class, but that is   not  because  they  are  members  of  a  caste  or community, but  because they  form a  class. In its ordinary connotation, the  expression ’class’  may mean a homogeneous section of  the people  grouped together  because of certain likenesses or  common traits,  and who  are identifiable  by some common  attributes such  as status,  rank,  occupation, residence in  a locality,  race, religion  and the like, but for purpose  of Art.  16(4) in determining whether a section forms a  class, a  test solely  based on  caste,  community, race, religion,  sex, descent,  place of  birth or residence cannot be  adopted because  it  would  directly  offend  the Constitution.  The   caste  as  the  basis  for  determining backwardness received a rude jolt. (1) [1967] 2 S.C.R. 265. (2) [1969] 1 S.C.R. 103. 381      In A.  Peeriakaruppan etc.  v. State  of Tamil  Nadu(1) this Court after referrening to earlier decisions especially in Balaji’s case and  Chitralekha’s case observed that there is no gain saying the fact that there are numerous castes in this country  which are socially and educationally backward. To ignore  their existence  is to  ignore the  realities  of life. It is difficult to make out whether the court accepted caste  as   the  sole   basis  for  determining  social  and educational backwardness.      In State  of Andhra  Pradesh &  Ors. v.  U.S.V.  Balram etc.(2) a list of backward classes which was under challenge prima facie  appeared to  have been drawn up on the basis of caste. The  Court on closer examination found that the caste mark is  merely a  description of  the group  following  the particular occupations  or professions exhaustively referred to by  the commission.  Even on the assumption that the list is based  exclusively  on  caste,  it  was  clear  from  the materials before  the Commission and the reasons given by it in  its  report  that  the  entire  caste  is  socially  and educationally backward  and therefore, the inclusion of sub- caste in  the list  of Backward Classes is warranted by Art. 15(4). The  caste remained  the  criterion  for  determining social and educational backwardness. The assumption that all the members  of a given caste are socially and educationally backward is  wholly  unfounded  and  lacks  factual  support obtained by survey.      In Janki  Prased Parimoo  & Ors  etc. etc.  v. State of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors. (8) it was observed that mere poverty cannot be  a test  of backwardness  because in  this country except for  a small percentage of the population, the people are generally  poor-some being  more poor, others less poor. In the  rural areas  some  sectors  of  the  population  are advancing socially and educationally while other sectors are apathetic,  Applying   this  yardstick,   priestly   classes following a  traditional  profession  was  held  not  to  be

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 28 of 106  

socially and  educationally backward.  Cultivators  of  land designated as  backward measured  by the size of the holding was held  to be  impermissible on  the ground  that  placing economic consideration  alone above other considerations, is erroneous to determine social and educational backwardness.      (1) [1971] 2 S.C.R. 430.      (2) [1972] 3 S.C.R. 247.      (3) [1973] 3 S.C.R. 236. 382      In State  of Uttar  Pradesh v.  Pradip Tandon & Ors.(1) reservations in  favour  of  rural  areas  was  held  to  be unsustainable on  the ground  that it  cannot be  said as  a general proposition that rural areas represents socially and educationally backward classes of citizens. Poverty in rural areas cannot  be the  basis  of  classification  to  support reservation for rural areas.      In State  of Kerala & Anr. v. N.M. Thomas & Ors.(2) the constitutional validity of Rule 13A giving further exemption of two  years to  members belonging  to Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes  in the  service  from  passing  the  tests referred to  in r.  13 or  r. 13A,  was questioned. The High Court struck  down the  rule.  Allowing  the  State  appeal, Mathew, J.  in his  concurring judgment  held that  to  give equality of  opportunity for  employment to  the members  of Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled  Tribes, it  is necessary to take  note   of  their   social,  educational  and  economic backwardness. Not  only is the Directive principles embodied in  Art.   46  binding  On  the  law  makers  as  ordinarily understood, but  it should equally inform and illuminate the approach of  the court when it makes a decision as the court also is  State within  the meaning  of Art. 12 and makes law even though  interstitially. Existence  of equality  depends not merely  on  the  absence  of  disabilities  but  on  the presence  of   disabilities.  To   achieve  it  differential treatment of persons who are unequal is permissible. This is what is styled as compensatory discrimination or affirmative action. In  a concurring judgment, Krishna lyer, J. Observed that the  genius of  Arts- 14 and 16 consists not in literal equality  but   in  progressive  elimination  of  pronounced inequality. To  treat sharply  dissimilar persons equally is subtle injustice. Equal opportunity is a hope, not a menace.      In Kumari  K.S. Jayasree  & Anr.  v. The State kerala & Anr.(3) it  was held that the problem of determining who are socially and  educationally backward  classes is undoubtedly not simple.  Dealing with  the question whether caste can by itself be  a basis  for determining  social and  educational backwardness,  the   court  observed  that  it  may  not  be irrelevant to  consider  the  caste  of  group  of  citizens claiming  to   be  socially   and  educationally   backward. Occupations,  place  of  habitation  may  also  be  relevant factors in  determining who  are socially  and educationally backward classes.      (1) [1975] 2 S.C.R. 761,      (2) [1976] 1 S.C.R. 906.      (3) [1977] 1 S.C.R. 194. 383      In Akhil  Bharatiya Soshit  Karamchari Sangh  (Railway) represented by  its Assistant General Secretary on behalf of the Association  v. A  Union of  India &  Ors.(l) this Court upheld reservation  of posts at various levels and making of various  concessions   in  favour  of  the  members  of  the Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled  Tribes.  Krishna  Iyer,  J. extensively  quoting   from  the   final  address   to   the Constituent Assembly by Dr. Ambedkar held that the political democracy was  not the  end in  view  of  the  struggle  for

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 29 of 106  

freedom but  a social democracy was to be Set up by which it was meant  the social fabric resting on the principle of one man one  value. Translated  functionally,  it  means  ’total abolition of social and economic inequalities.’      This brief  review would  clearly put  into focus,  the dithering and  the vacillation  on the part of the Judiciary in dealing  with the  question of  reservation in  favour of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes as well as other socially and educationally  backward classes.  Judiciary retained its traditional  blindfold  on  its  eyes  and  thereby  ignored perceived  realities.   A  perceptive   viewer  of  judicial intervention observed  that the courts turned out to be more limited as  a vantage  point then  I naively  assumed at the outset. They act as a balance wheel channelling compensatory policies and accommodating them to other commitments, but it is the  political process  that shapes the larger contour of these policies  and gives  them their motive force. Official doctrine-judicial    pronouncements     or    administrative regulations-proved insufficient  guide to  the shape  of the policies in  action and  the result  they produced.’(2)  The Indian social  scene apart  from being  disturbing presented the picture of stratified society hierarchically fragmented. At the  lowest rung of the ladder stand Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes  and any  preferential treatment  in  their favour has  more or  less ment  with judicial  approval. But when it came to preferential treatment or affirmative action or what is also called compensatory discrimination in favour of socially  and educationally backward classes of citizens, the caste  ridden society  raised  its  ugly  face.  By  its existence over  thousands of  years, more  or  less  it  was assumed that caste should be the criterion for deter- mining social and  educational backwardness. In other words, it was said, look  at the  caste,  its  traditional  functions,  it position in  relation to  upper castes  by the  standard  of purity and  pollution, pure and not so pure occupation, once these questions are satisfactorily answered without anything more, those who belong to that      (1) [1981] 2 S.C.R. 185.      (2) Marc Galanter-Compoting Equalities, 1980 p. XVIII. 384 caste must  be labelled socially and educationally backward. This A  over-simplified approach  ignored a  very  realistic situation existing  in each  caste that  in every such caste whose  members   claim  to  be  socially  and  educationally backward, had an economically well placed segments. But that may wait.  We are  at present  concerned with  the  judicial response  to   the  attempt   of  the  Executive  to  accord preferential  treatment   to  socially   and   educationally backward classes  of citizens.  The litigation which came to the court  was more often by those who relied on meritocracy and complained  that the  merit is crucified at the altar of the mirage of equality. The outcome of judicial intervention against preferred treatment is summed up as under:           "Summing up,  we may surmise that the gross effect      of litigation on the compensatory discrimination policy      has been  to curtail  and confine  it. Those  who  have      attacked compensatory  discrimination schemes  in court      have compiled  a remarkable  record of  success,  while      those seeking  to  extend  compensatory  discrimination      have been less successful.’’(1)      The controversy now has shifted to identifying socially and  educationally   backward  classes   of  citizens.   The expression ’back  ward classes’  is not defined. Courts have more or  loss in  the absence  of well-defined  criteria not based on  caste label  has veered  round to the view that in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 30 of 106  

order to be socially and educationally backward classes, the group must  have the  same indicia  as Scheduled  Castes and Scheduled  Tribes.   The  narrow  question  that  the  being examined  here is whether cast label should be sufficient to identify social  and  educational  backwardness?  Number  of Commissions have  attempted to  tackle this complex problem. However, both  Mandal Commission  of  Karnataka  and  Bakshi Commission of  Gujrat have  finally accepted  caste  as  the identifying criterion for determining social and educational backwardness, thought  will be  presently pointed  out  that Mandal  Commission  had  serious  reservations  about  caste criterion. Most  of these  Commissions  and  the  Government orders based  their recommendations  used communal  units to discriminate the  backward class.  Rane Commission of Gujrat has chalked  out a  different path,  rejecting caste  as the basis for  ascertaining social and educational backwardness. The question we must pose and      (1) Marc Gallanter , Competing Equalities, p. 511. 385 answer is  whether caste should be the basis for determining social and educational backwardness. In other words, by what yardstick, groups  which are  to be  treated as socially and educationally backward are to be identified? To simplify the question: should  membership of  caste signify  a  class  of citizens as  being socially  and educationally backward ? If ’caste’ is  adopted as  the criterion for determining social and educational backwardness does it provide a valid test or it would  violate Art.  15(1) which prohibits discrimination against any  citizen on  grounds of  religion, race,  caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.      What then  is a caste ? Though caste has been discussed by scholars  and  jurists,  no  precise  definition  of  the expression has  emerged. A  caste is  a horizontal segmental division of  society spread  over a  district or a region or the whole  State and  also  sometimes  outside  it.(’)  Homo Hierarchicus is  expected to  be the central and substantive element of the caste system with differentiate it from other social  systems.   The  concept   of  purity   and  impurity conceptualises the  caste system.  Louis Dumont asserts that the principle  of the  opposition of the pure and the impure underlies hierarchy, which is the superiority of the pure to the impure, underlies separation because pure and the impure must be  kept separate  and underlies the division of labour because pure  and impure  occupations must likewise, be kept separate.(2) There  are four essential features of the caste system which maintained its homo hierarchicus character: (1) hierarchy (2)  commensality: (3)  restrictions on marriages; and (4)  hereditary occupation.(3)  Most of  the  caste  are endogamous  groups.  Intermarriage  between  two  groups  is impermissible.  But  ’Pratilom’  marriages  are  not  wholly unknown. Similarly with the onward movement of urbanisation, members of  various castes are slowly giving up, traditional occupations and  the pure  and impure  avocations  is  being frowned upon  by developing  notion of  dignity of labour As the  fruits   of  independence  were  unequally  distributed amongst various segments of the society, in each caste there came into  existence a  triple division  based  on  economic resurgence amongst  the members of the caste. Those who have become economically  well off  have acquired  an upper class status (class  consciousness) and  the one on the step below is the  middle class  and the  third one  belongs to  poorer section      (1)  I.P.  Desai:  Should  ’caste’  be  the  Basis  for Recognising Backwardness [1985].      (2) Louise Dumont-Home Hierachicus [1970]

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 31 of 106  

    (3) Caste in Contemporary India: G. Shah [1985]. 386 of the caste. This led to the realisation that caste culture does not  help economic interest. In fact the upper crust of the same  caste is  verily accused  of exploiting  the lower strata of  the same  caste. It  is therefore, rightly argued that the  basis of  the  caste  system  namely,  purity  and pollution  is   slowly  being   displaced  by  the  economic condition of  the various  segments of the same caste. It is recognised on almost all hands that the important feature of the caste structure are progressively suffering erosion. The new  organisation,  the  so-called  caste  organisation,  is substantially different  from the  traditional structure and caste councils. Economic differentiation amongst the members of the  caste has  become sharp, but not so sharp as to bury caste sentiments and ties.      If the  transformation of the caste structure as herein indicated is  realistically accepted, should the caste label be still  accepted as  the basis  for determining social and educational backwardness.  In a  recent paper  by the  noted sociologist Shri  I.P. Desai  (Alas, he  is no more), it has been ably  argued that  not a  caste but  the class  or  the social group  should be  examined with a view to determining their social  and educational  backwardness. Caste  in rural society is  more often  than not  mirrored in  the  economic power wielded  by it  and vice  versa. Social  hierarchy and economic position  exhibit an  undisputable  mutuality.  The lower the  caste, the  poorer its  members. The  poorer  the members of  a caste, the lower the caste. Caste and economic situation, reflecting  each other  as they  do arc  the Deus exMachina of  the social  status occupied  and the  economic power wielded  by an  individual or  class in rural society. Social status and economic power are so woven and fused into the caste  system in  Indian  rural  society  that  one  may without hesitation,  say that if poverty be the cause, caste is the  primary index of social backwardness, so that social backwardness is often readily identifiable with reference to a person’s  caste. Such  we must  recognize is  the primeval force and  omnipresence of caste in Indian Society, however, much we  may like to wish it away. So Sadly and oppressively deep-rooted is  caste in  our country that it has cut across even  the   barriers  of  religion.  The  caste  system  has penetrated other  religious and  dissentient Hindu  sects to whom the  practice of  caste should be anathema and today we fined that  practitioner of other religious faiths and Hindu dissentients are some times as rigid adherents to the system of caste  as the  conservative Hindus  . We  find  Christian harijans, Christian 387 Madars, Christian  Reddys, Christian  Kammas,  Mujbi  Sikhs, etc. etc.  In Andhra  Pradesh there  is a community known as Pinjaras or  Dudekulas (known  in the  North as ’Rui Pinjane Wala’):  (Professional   cotton-beaters)  who   are   really Muslims, but are treated in rural society, for all practical purposes, as  a Hindu  caste. Several other instances may be given.      Shared  situation  in  the  economic  hierarchy,  caste gradation, occupation,  habitation,  style  of  consumption, standard of  literacy and  a variety  of such  other factors appear  to   go  to  make  towards  social  and  educational backwardness. In  some situations  and indeed  quite  often, social investigator  may easily  be able to identify a whole caste group  as a socially and educationally backward class; he may readily recognise people living in certain areas, say mountainous, desert  a fresh lease of life. In fact there is

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 32 of 106  

a mad  rush for  being recognised  as belonging  to a  caste which by  its nomenclature  would be included in the list of socially and  educationally backward classes. To illustrate: Bakshi Commission  in Gujrat recognised as many as 82 castes as  being   socially  and  educationally  backward.  On  the publication of  its report,  Government of  Gujrat  received representations by  members of those castes who had not made any representation  to the  Bakshi Commission  for  treating them as socially and educationally backward. This phenomenon was noticed  by Mandal Commission when it observed: "whereas the Commission  has tried  to make  the State  wise lists of OBCS as  comprehensive as  possible, it is quite likely that severally synonymy  of the  castes listed backward have been left out.  Certain castes  are known by a number of synonymy which vary  from one  region to the other and their complete coverage is  almost impossible.  Mandal Commission found a p way out  by recommending that if a particular caste has been treated as  backward then all its synonyms whether mentioned in the  State  lists  or  not  should  also  be  treated  as backward.(1) Gujrat  Government  was  forced  to  appoint  a second commission  known as  Rane Commission Rane Commission took note of the fact that there was an organised effort for being considered socially and educationally backward castes. Rane Commission  recalled the  observations in Balaji’s case that ’Social  backwardness is  on the  ultimate analysis the result of  poverty to  a very  large extent.’ The Commission noticed that  some of  the castes just for the sake of being considered as  socially  and  educationally  backward,  have degraded      (1) Mandal Commission Report Vol. Ch. XII p. 55. 388 themselves to such an extent that, they had no hesitation in attributing different  types of  vices  to  and  associating other factors indicative of backwardness, with their castes. The  Commission  noted  that  the  malaise  requires  to  be remedied. The  Commission therefore,  devised a  method  for determining  socially  and  educationally  backward  classes without reference  to caste,  beneficial to  all sections of people irrespective  of the  caste to which they belong. The Commission came  to an  irrefutable conclusion  that amongst certain castes  and communities  or class  of  people,  only lower  income   groups  amongst   them  are   socially   and educationally  backward.   We  may   recall  here   a  trite observation in case of N.M.Thomas which reads as under:           "A word  of sociological  caution. In the light of      experience,  here   and  elsewhere,   the   danger   of      ’reservation’, it  seems  to  me,  is  three-fold.  Its      benefits, by  and large,  are snatched  away by the top      creamy layer  of the  ’backward’ caste  or class,  thus      keeping the  weakest among  the week  always  weak  and      leaving the fortunate layers to consume the whole cake.      Secondly, this  claim is  over played  extravagntly  in      democracy by  large and  vocal groups  whole burden  of      backwardness has  been substantially  lightened by  the      march of time and measures of better education and more      opportunities of  employment,  but  wish  to  weak  the      ’weaker section’  label as  a means to score over their      near-equals   formally   categorised   as   the   upper      brackets."      A few  other aspects  for rejecting  caste as the basis for identifying  social and  educational backwardness may be briefly noted.  If State  patronage for  preferred treatment accepts caste  as the  only insignia  for determining social and educational  backwardness, the  danger looms  large that this approach  alone would  legitimise and  perpetuate caste

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 33 of 106  

system. lt  does not  go well  with our  proclaimed  secular character as  enshrined in the Preamble to the Constitution. The assumption  that all  members of  some caste are equally socially and  educationally backward  is  not  well-founded. Such an approach provides an oversimplification of a complex problem  of   identifying   the   social   and   educational backwardness.  The   Chairman  of   the   Backward   Classes Commission, set  up in  1953,  after  having  finalised  the report, concluded  that ’it  would have  been better  if  we could determine  the criteria  of backwardness on principles other than 389 caste.’(1) Lastly  it is recognised without dissent that the caste based reservation has been usurped by the economically well-placed section   in  the same  caste. To illustrate, it may be pointed that some years ago, I came across a petition for special  leave against  the decision  of the  Punjab and Haryana High  Court in  which the  reservation of 2-1/2" for admission to  Medical and  Engineering College  in favour of Majhabi Sikhs  was challenged  by none  other than the upper crust of  the members  of the Scheduled Castes amongst Sikhs in Punjab,  proving that  the  labelled  weak  exploits  the really weaker.  Add to  this, the  findings of  the Research Planning  Scheme   of  Sociologists   assisting  the  Mandal Commission when it observed: ’while determining the criteria of  socially  and  educationally  backward  classes,  social backwardness should be considered to be the critical element and educational backwardness to be the linked element though not  necessarily  derived  from  the  former.’(2)  The  team ultimately concluded  that ’social  backwardness  refers  to ascribed status  and educational  backwardness  to  achieved status,  and   it  considered  social  backwardness  as  the critical element  and educational  backwardness  to  be  the linked though  not derived  element.’  ’The  attempt  is  to identify  socially  and  educationally  backward-classes  of citizens. The  caste, as  is understood in Hindu Society, is unknown to  Muslims,  Christians,  Parsis,  Jews  etc  Caste criterion would not furnish a reliable yardstick to identify socially   and   educationally   backward   group   in   the aforementioned  communities   though  economic  backwardness would.      Therefore, a  time has come to review the criterion for identifying  socially  and  educationally  backward  classes ignoring the  caste label.  The only  criterion which can be realistically devised  is the  one of economic backwardness. To this  may be  added some  relevant criteria  such as  the secular character  of the group, its opportunity for earning livelihood etc.  but by and large economic backwardness must be the load star. Why I say this ?      Chronic poverty  is the  bane of Indian Society. Market economic and  money spinning  culture  has  transformed  the general behavior  of the  Society towards its members. Upper caste does  net enjoy  the status  or respect,  traditional, voluntary or  forced any  more even  in rural  areas what to speak of highly westernised urban society.      (1) Backward Classes Commission Report Vol. I Ch. XIV.      (2) Part  3 Appendix  XIII, p.  99 of the Report of the Team. 390 The bank  balance, the  property holding and the money power deter mine the social status of the individual and guarantee the opportunity  to rise  to the top echelon. How the wealth is  acquired   has  lost   significance.  Purity   of  means disappeared with Mahatama Gandhi and we have reached a stage where  ends   determine  the  means.  This  is  the  present

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 34 of 106  

disturbing situation  whether one  likes  it  or  not.  Rane Commission on  the evidence before it and after applying the relevant tests and criteria observed as under:           "We have  found on  applying relevant tests and on      the basis  of the  evidence on  record, that  there()re      certain castes/communities  or classes  of people which      are backward,  but, only  lower income  groups  amongst      them are  socially and educationally backward. In order      to ensure  that, no  ambiguity remains in regard to the      above aspect,  we may  add that, the above observations      hold good  even in  respect of  those classes which are      identified  as   socially  and  educationally  backward      without reference to any caste."(1)      Reservation in  one or  other form  has been  there for decades. If  a survey  is made with reference to families in various castes  considered to  be socially and educationally backward, about  the benefits  of  preferred  treatment,  it would unmistakably  show that  the benefits  of reservations are snatched  away by  the top  creamy layer of the backward castes. This has to be avoided at any cost.      If poverty  is to  be  the  criterion  for  determining social and  educational backwardness,  we must  deal with  a fear expressed by sociologists. It is better to recapitulate these aspects in the words of a sociologist:           "Now, if  the government  changes the  criteria of      reservation from caste to class, persons from the upper      strata of  the lower  castes who are otherwise not able      to compete  with the  upper strata  of the upper castes      despite the  reservations will  be  excluded  from  the      white collar  jobs. And  the  persons  from  the  lower      strata of lower castes will not be able to compete with      their counterpart of the upper castes. They too will be      excluded. This      (1) Report of Rane Commission Chapter XII prge 12.1. 391      will bridge the gap which is otherwise widening between      the rich  and the  poor of the upper castes and it will      strengthen their  caste identity.  It will wipe out the      small poor  strata of  the upper  castes at the cost of      the poor  strata of  lower castes,  and in  the name of      secularism. In course of time the upper caste will also      become the upper class. Such a process would hamper the      growth of secular forces."(1) This fear  psychosis is  effectively answered  by an eminent academic. He  says that  ’if the  poor can  be operationally defined, categorised  and  sub-categorised  and  reservation benefits be stratified accordingly, would the scenario still haunt use?  I think  not. He  recognised that  this point is valuable in  terms of  alerting everyone  to  the  need  for further  refinement  of  the  notions  of  poor  strata.  He recognised that  the State  is, with all its limitations and resources, to  direct and  plan social  transformation. (The non-revolutionary) choice  is between reinforcing ’caste’ or reinforcing the extant constitutional values ’ (2)      Let me conclude. If economic criterion for compensatory discrimination or  affirmative action  is accepted, it would strike  at   the  root   cause  of  social  and  educational backwardness, and  simultaneously take  a vital  step in the direction of  destruction of  destruction of caste structure which in  turn would  advance the  secular character  of the Nation. This  approach seeks  to translate  into reality the twin  constitutional   goals:  one,   to   strike   at   the perpetuation of  the  caste  stratification  of  the  Indian Society so  as to  arrest progressive movement and to take a firm step towards establishing a casteless society; and two,

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 35 of 106  

to progressively  eliminate poverty by giving an opportunity to the  disadvantaged sections of the society to raise their position and  be part  of the mainstream of life which means eradication of poverty.      Let me  make abundantly  clear that  this approach does not deal  with reservation in favour of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.  Thousands of  years of discrimination and exploitation cannot be wiped out in one generation. But even here  economic  criterion  is  worth  applying  by  refusing preferred treatment to those amongst      (1) G. Shah IPW January 17, 1983.      (2)  Upendra   Baxi,  Vice-Chanceller,   South  Gujarat University, in  ’Caste, Class  and Reservations: A Rejoinder to Ghansham Shah. 392 them who  have already  benefitted by  it and improved their position.   And finally  reservation must  have a  time span otherwise concessions  tend to become vested interests. This is not  a judgment  in a  lis in  adversary system. When the arguments  concluded,   a  statement   was  made   that  the Government of State of Karanataka would appoint a Commission to   determine   constitutionally   sound   and   nationally acceptable  criteria   for   identifying   socially   ar   d educationally backward classes of citizens for whose benefit the State action would be taken. This does not purport to be an exhaustive  essay on  guidelines but  may point  to  some extent, the  direction  in  which  the  proposed  Commission should move.      CHINNAPA REDDY, J. Over three decades have passed since we  promised   ourselves  "justice,   social,  economic  and political" and  "equality of  status and  opportunity". Yet, even today,  we find members of castes, communities, classes or by  whatever name  you may  describe them,  jockeying for position, trying  to elbow each other out, and, viewing with one another  to be  named and  recognised as  ’socially  and educationally  backward   classes’,  to   quality  for   the ’privilege’ of the special provision for advancement and the provision for  reservation that may be made under Art. 15(4) & 16(4)  of the  Constitution. The  paradox of the system of reservation is  that it  has engendered  a  spirit  of  self denigration among  the people. Now here else in the world do castes, classes  or communities  queue up  for the  sake  of gaining the  backward statue.  Nowhere else  in the world is there competition  to assert  backwardness and  to claim ’we are  more  backward  than  you’.  This  is  an  unhappy  and disquieting situation,  but it  is stark  reality.  Whatever gloss one  may like  to put  upon it,  it is  clear from the rival claims  in these  appeals and  writ petitions that the real contest  here is between certain members of two premier (population-wise) caste-community-classes  of Karnataka, the Lingayats and  the Vokkaligas,  each claiming that the other is not  a socially and educationally backward class and each keen  to   be  included   in  the   list  of   socially  and educationally backward  classes. To  them, to  be  dubbed  a member of  the socially  and educationally back ward classes is a passport for entry into professional colleges and State services; so they jostle with each other and in tho bargain, some time they keep out and some times they usher in some of those entitled  to legitimate  entry, by  competition or  by reservation. Commissions  have been appointed in the past to identify the  backward classes,  Governments have considered the reports  of the commissions, and Courts have scrutinised the decisions  of Governments, Case s have reached the Court too, then and now again. Once more we are told 393

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 36 of 106  

that the  State of  Karnataka is  ready to  appoint  another commission and  they have  asked us will you kindly lay down some guidelines?"      Ours  is  a  country  of  great  economic,  social  and cultural  diversity.  Often  we  take  great  pride  in  the country’s cultural  diversity. While cultural diversity adds to the  splendor of  India, the others add to our sorrow and shame.  The   social  and  economic  disparties  are  indeed despairingly  vast.  The  Scheduled  Castes,  the  Scheduled Tribes and  the other  socially and  educationally  backward classes, all  of whom  have been  compendiously described as ’the weaker  sections of  the people’  have long journeys to make society.  They need  aid; they need facility; they need launching; they  need  propulsion.  Their  needs  are  their demands. The  demands  are  matters  of  right  and  not  of philanthropy. They ask for parity, and not charity. The days of Dronacharya  and Ekalavya  are  over.  They  claim  their constitutional  right   to  equality   of  status   and   of opportunity and economic and social justice. Several bridges have to  be erected  so that  they may  cross  the  Rubicon. Professional education  and employment  under the  State are thought to  be two such bridges. Hence the special provision for advancement  and for  reservation under  Arts. 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution.      Before we  attempt to  lay down  any guidelines for the benefit of  the Commission  proposed to  be appointed by the Karnataka Government, will do well to warn ourselves and the proposed Commission against the pitfalls of the traditional’ approach towards  the question  of reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled  Tribes and  other backward  classes which has  generally   been  superior,   elitist  and,  therefore, ambivalent.  A   duty  to   undo  an  evil  which  had  been perpetrated through the generations is thought ’to betoken a generosity and  farsightedness that are rare among nations’. So a  superior and  patronising  attitude  is  adopted.  The result is  that  the  claim  of  the  Scheduled  Castes  and Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes to equality as a matter of  human and  constitutional right  is forgotten and their rights  are submerged  in what  is  described  as  the ’proferential  principle’  or  ’protective  or  compensatory discrimination’,   expression    borrowed   from    American jurisprudence  Unless   we  get   rid  of   these  superior, patronising and  paternalist attitudes, what the French Call Le  mentalite   hierarchique,  it   is  difficult  to  truly appreciate  the  problems  involved  in  the  claim  of  the Scheduled  Castes,   Scheduled  Tribes  and  other  backward classes for  their legitimate  share of the benefits arising out of their belonging to humanity and to a country 394 whose constitution  preaches justice,  social, economic  and political  and equality of status and opportunity for all.      One of the results of the superior, elitist approach is that the question of reservation is invariably viewed as the conflict  between   the   meritarian   principle   and   the compensatory principle.  No, it is not so. The real conflict is between  the class  of people,  who have never been in or who have  already  moved  out  of  the  desert  of  poverty, illiteracy and  backwardness and are entrenched in the oasis of convenient  living and  those who are still in the desert and want  to reach  the oasis.  There is not enough fruit in the garden  and so  those who are in, want to keep out those who are  out. The  disastrous consequences  of the so-called meritarian principle  to the  vast majority  of  the  under- nourished, povetity-stricken, barely literate and vulnerable people of our country are too obvious to be stated And, what

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 37 of 106  

is merit  ? There is no merit in a system which brings about such consequences.  Is not  a child of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes  or other  backward classes  who  has  been brought up  in an atmosphere of penury, illiteracy and anti- culture, who  is looked  down upon by tradition and society, who has  no books and magazines to read at home, no radio to listen, no  T.V. to  watch, no one to help him with his home work, who  goes  to  the  nearest  local  board  school  and college, whose  parents are either illiterate or so ignorant and informed  that he  cannot even hope to seek their advice on any  matter of  importance, a  child  who  must  perforce trudge  to  the  nearest  public  reading  room  to  read  a newspaper to  know what  is happening  in the world, has not this child  got merit  if he,  with all his disadvantages is able to  secure the  qualifying 40% or 50% of the marks at a competitive examination  where the  children  of  the  upper classes who  have all  the advantages,  who go to St. Paul’s High School  and St. Stephen’s College, and who have perhaps been specially coached for the examination may secure 70, 80 or even  90% of the marks? Surely, a child who has been able to jump  so many  hurdles may  be expected  to do better and better as  he progresses in life. If spring flower he cannot be, autumn  flower he may be. Why than, should he be stopped at the  threshold on  an alleged  meritarian principle?  The requirements of  efficiency may always be safeguarded by the prescription of  minimum standards.  Mediocrity  has  always triumphed in  the past in the case of the upper classes. But why should the so-called meritarian principle be put against mediocrity when  we  come  to  Scheduled  Castes,  Scheduled Tribes and backward classes? 395      Efficiency is  very much  on the lips of the privileged whenever reservation  is mentioned.  Efficiency,  it  seems, will be  impaired if  the   total reservation exceeds 50 per cent; efficiency,  it  seems,  will  suffer  if  the  ’carry forward’ rule  is adopted;  efficiency, it  seems,  will  be injured  if   the  rule   of  reservation   is  extended  to promotional posts.  from the  protests  against  reservation exceeding 50  per cent or extending to promotional posts and against the  carry-forward rule,  one would  think that  the civil service  is a  Heavenly Paradise  into which  only the archangels, the chosen of the elite, the very best may enter and may be allowed to go higher up the ladder. But the truth is otherwise.  The truth  is that  the civil  service is  no paradise and  the upper  echelons belonging  to  the  chosen classes  are  not  necessarily  models  of  efficiency.  The underlying assumption  that those  belonging  to  the  upper castes and  classes, who  are appointed  to the non-reserved castes will,  because of  their presumed  merit, ’naturally’ perform better   than  those who  have been appointed to the reserved posts  and that the clear stream of efficiency will be polluted  by the  infiltration of  the  latter  into  the sacred precincts  is a  vicious assumption,  typical of  the superior approach  of the  elitist classes. There is neither statistical basis  nor  expert  evidence  to  support  these assumptions that  efficiency will necessarily be impaired if reservation exceeds  50 per  cent, if reservation is carried forward or  if reservation is extended to promotional posts. Arguments are  advanced and  opinions are expressed entirely on an  ad hoc  presumptive basis. The age long contempt with which the  ’superior’ or  ’forward’ castes  have treated the ’inferior’ or  ’backward’  casts  is  now  transforming  and crystalising itself  into an unfair prejudice, conscious and sub-conscious, ever  since the  ’inferior’ casts and classes started claiming  their legitimate  share of the cake, which

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 38 of 106  

naturally means,  for the  ’superior’ castes  parting with a bit  of  it.  Although  in  actual  practice  their  virtual monopoly  on   elite  occupations   and  posts   is   hardly threatened, the forward castes are nevertheless increasingly afraid that  they might  lose this  monopoly in  the  higher ranks of  Government service  and the  profession. It  is so difficult for  the ’superior’  castes to understand and rise above their  prejudice  and  it  is  so  difficult  for  the inferior castes and classes to overcome the bitter prejudice and opposition which they are forced to face at every stage. Always one  hears the word efficiency as if it is sacrosanct and the  sanctorum has  to be fiercely guarded. ’Efficiency’ is not  a mantra  which is  whispered by  the  Guru  in  the Sishya’s  ear.  The  mere  securing  of  high  marks  at  an examination may not necessarily mark out a good 396 administrator. An  efficient administrator,  one  takes  it, must be  one A  who  possesses  among  other  qualities  the capacity to  understand with  sympathy  and,  therefore,  to tackle bravely the problems of a large segment of populating constituting the  weaker sections  of the  people. And,  who better than  the ones  belonging to those very sections? Why not ask  ourselves why  35  years  after  independence,  the position of  the Scheduled  Castes,  etc.  has  not  greatly improved? Is  it not  a legitimate  question to  ask whether things  might   have  been   different,  had   the  District Administrators and  the State  and Central  Bureaucrats been drawn in  larger numbers  from these classes? Courts are not equipped to  answer these  questions, but the courts may not interfere with  the honest  endeavours of  the Government to find answers  and solutions.  We do  not mean  to  say  that efficiency in the civil service is necessary or that it is a myth. All  that we  mean to  say is that one need not make a fastidious fetish  of it.  It may be that for certain posts, only the  best may be appointed and for certain courses ! of study only the best may be admitted [f so, rules may provide for reservations  for appointment  to  such  posts  and  for admission to  such courses.  The rules  may provide  for  no appropriate method  of selection.  It may  be  that  certain posts require  a very high degree of skill or efficiency and certain courses  of study  require a high degree of industry and intelligence.  If so,  the rules  may prescribe  a  high minimum qualifying  standard and  an appropriate  method  of selection. Different  minimum standards  and different modes of selection  may be  prescribed for different posts and for admission to different courses of study having regard to the requirements of  the posts  and the courses of study. No one will suggest  that the  degree t  of efficiency  required  a cardiac or  a neuro-surgeon  is the  same as  the degree  of efficiency  required  of  a  general  medical  practitioner. Similarly no  will suggest  that the  degree of industry and intelligence expected  of a candidate seeking admission to a research degree  course need  be  the  same  as  that  of  a candidate seeking  admission  to  an  ordinary  arts  degree course. We do not, therefore, mean to say that efficiency is to be altogether discounted. All that we mean to say is that it cannot  be permitted  to be  used as  a camouflage to let that upper classes take advantage of the backward classes in its name  and to  monopolise the  services, particularly the higher posts  and  the  professional  institutions.  We  are afraid we  have to  rid our  minds of many cobwebs before we arrive at the core of the problem. The quest for equality is self elusive,  we must  lose our  illusions, though  not our faith. It  is the  dignity of  man to  pursue the  quest for equality. It  will be advantageous to quote at this juncture

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 39 of 106  

R.H. Tawney in his classic work equality where he says. 397           "The truth  is that it is absurd and degrading for      me  to  make  much  of  their  intellectual  and  moral      superiority   to each  other and  still more  of  their      superiority in  the arts  which bring wealth and power,      because, judged by their place in any universal scheme,      they are  infinitely great or infinitely small .. . The      equality  which   all  these   thinkers  emphasise   as      desirable is  not equality  of capacity  or attainment,      but of circumstances, and institutions, and j manner of      life. The  equality  which  they  deplore  is  not  the      inequality of  personal gifts,  but of  the social  and      economic environment...  ...Their views,  in short,  is      that, because men are men, social institutions-property      rights, and  the  organisation  of  industry,  and  the      system  of   public  health   and  education-should  be      planned,  as  far  as  is  possible  to  emphasise  and      strengthen, not  the class differences which divide but      the common humanity which unite, them.. "      But the  controversy between  the  meritarian  and  the compensatory principals  cannot  be  allowed  to  cloud  the issues  before   us.  An  intelligible  consequence  of  the fundamental  rights   of  equality  before  the  law,  equal protection of  the  laws,  equality  of  opportunity,  etc., guaranteed to  all citizens  under our  Constitution is  the right of  the weaker  sections  of  the  people  to  special provision for  their admission into educational institutions and  representation   in  the   services.  Appreciating  the realities  of   the  situation.   and  least  there  by  any misapprehension, the  Constitution has taken particular care to specially  mention this  right of  the weaker sections of the people  in Arts. 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution. In view of  Arts. 15(4)  and 16(4)  the  so-called  controversy between the meritarian and compensatory principles is not of any great significance, though, of course, we do not suggest efficiency should be sacrificed. The question really is, who are the  scheduled castes,  scheduled  tribes  and  backward classes,  who   are  entitled   to  special   provision  and reservation  in   regard  to   admission  into   educational institutions and  representation in  the services. So far as Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled  Tribes are  concerned,  the question of  their identification  stands  resolved  by  the notifications issued  by the President under Part XVI of the Constitution.  The   problem  is   only  in  regard  to  the identification  of  the  other  socially  and  educationally backward classes.  The question  really is  how to  identify these backward  classes to entitle them to entry through the doors of  Arts. 15(4)  and 16(4). And, the further question, naturally, is about the limits of reservation. 398      We are  afraid the  courts are not necessarily the most competent to  identify the  backward classes  or to lay down guidelines for their identification except in broad and very general way.  We are not equipped for that; we have no legal barometers to  measure social  backwardness.  We  are  truly removed from  the people, particularly those of the backward classes, by  layer upon  layer of gradation and degradation. And, India  is such a vast country that conditions vary from State to  State, region  to region, district to district and from one  ethnic religious,  linguistic or  caste  group  to another. A  test to  identify  backward  classes  which  may appear appropriate  when applied  to one group of people may be wholly  inappropriate  and  unreasonable  if  applied  to another group  of people.  There can  be no  universal test;

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 40 of 106  

there can  be no  exclusive test; there can be no conclusive test. In  fact, it  may be  futile to apply any rigid tests. One may  have to  look at the generality and the totality of the situation.      We do generally understand what we mean when we talk of the richer  classes, the  poorer classes,  the upper  middle class, the  lower middle  classes,  the  ruling  class,  the privileged class,  the working class, the exploited classes, etc. etc.  In what  senses the  word ’classes’  used in Art. 15(4) and  in Art.  16(4) of  the Constitution?  What is the meaning of  the  expression  ’socially’  and  ’educationally backward classes’?  What does  backwardness consist  in?  To have  a   clear  understanding   of   what   is   meant   by ’backwardness’,  ’backward   classes’  and   ’socially   and educationally backward  classes’, we  must have  an idea  of what social  inequality is about. Max Weber gives us a three dimensional  picture  of  social  inequality.  According  to Weber, the  three dimensions  are class, status and power. A person’s class-situation,  in the  Weber sense,  is what  he shares with  others, similarly  placed  in  the  process  of production, distribution and exchange, a definition of class which is  very near  to that  of the  Marxist conception The inequality of  class  depends  primarily  on  inequality  of income and to some extent on an equal opportunity for upward mobility.   persons class, according this definition, is his shared situation  in the  economic  hierarchy.  Status,  the second of  Weber’s three  dimensions is generally determined by the  style of  consumption, though not necessarily by the source or  amount of  income. An  impoverised aristocrat  is sometimes sought  after by  the nouveau riche. A desk worker considers  himself   superior  to   a   manual   worker.   A professional like  a doctor  or a lawyer is thought to be of superior status  than those belonging to several other walks of life. Status seems to 399 depend on  social attributes  and styless of life, including dress, speech,  I occupation,  etc.,  on  what  R.H.  Tawney describes as ’the tedious A vulgarities of income and social position.’   Similarly,    class   and    status   are   not contemporeaneous with  power, though  power  and  class  can often be sen to be closely connected. Power is participation in the decision making process but those who wield power are not necessarily   the best paid nor the most respected. But, it is now obvious even to the most superficial observer that social and  political power is wielded in innumerable unseen ways by those who control economic power. Political power is remorselessly manipulated  by economic power. We, therefore, see that  everyone of  the three  dimensions  propounded  by Weber is intimately and inextricably connected with economic position.   However,    we   look   at   the   question   of ’backwardness’, whether  from the  angle of class, status or power, we  find the  economic factor at the bottom of it all and we  find poverty,  the culprit-cause  and  the  dominant characteristic  Poverty,  the  economic  factor  brands  all backwardness  just   as  the   erect  posture   brands   the homosapiens and distinguishes him from all other animals, in the  eyes of the beholder from Mars. But, whether his racial stock  is   Caucasian,  Mongoloid,  Negroid,  etc.,  further investigation will  have to  be made.  So  too  the  further question of  social and  educational  backwardness  requires further  scrutiny.   In  India,   the  matter   is   further aggravated, complicated  and pitilessly  tyrannised  by  the ubiquitous caste  system, a unique and devastating system of gradation and  degradation  which  has  divided  the  entire Indian and particularly Hindu society horizontally into such

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 41 of 106  

distinct layers as to be v destructive of mobility, a system which has  penetrated and  corrupted the  mind and  soul  of every Indian  citizen. It  is a notorious fact that there is an upper  crust of  rural society consisting of the superior castes,  generally   the  priestla,  the  landlord  and  the merchant castes,  there is a bottom strata consisting of the ’out-castes’ of  Indian Rural  Society, namely the Scheduled Castes, and,  in between  the highest  and the lowest, there are large  segments of  population who  because of  the  law gradation of  The caste  to which  they belong  in the rural society hierarchy,  because of  the humble  occupation which they pursue  , because  of their  poverty and  ignorance are also condemned  to  backwardness,  social  and  educational, backwardness which  prevents them  from competing  on  equal terms to catch up with the upper crust      Any view of the caste system, class or cursory, will at once reveal  the firm  links which the caste system has with economic power.  Land  and  learning,  two  of  the  primary sources of economic power in 400 India have  till recently  been the monopoly of the superior castes. Occupational  skills were  practised by  the  middle castes and  in the  economic system prevailing till now they could  rank   in  the   system  next   only  to  the  castes constituting the  landed and  the learned gentry. The lowest in the  hierarchy where  those who were assigned the meanest task, the  out-castes who  wielded no  economic  power.  The position of  a caste in rural society is more often than not mirroned in the economic power wielded by it and vice versa. Social  hierarchy   and   economic   position   exhibit   an undisputable mutuality.  The lower the caste, the poorer its members. The  poorer the members of a caste lower the caste. Caste and  economic situation, reflecting each other as they do are the Deus ex-Machina of the social status occupied and the economic  power wielded  by an  individual or  class  in rural society. Social status and economic power are so woven and fused into the caste system in Indian rural society that one may  without hesitation,  say that  if  poverty  be  the cause, caste is the primary index of social backwardness, so that social  backwardness is often readily identifiable with reference to  a person’s  caste. Such  we must recognised is the primeval  force and  omnipresence  of  caste  in  Indian Society, however, much we may like to wish it away. So Sadly and oppressively deep-rooted is caste in our country that it has out  across even  the barriers  of religion.  The  caste system has  penetrated other religious and dissentient Hindu sects to  whom the  practice of caste should be anathema and today we  find that  practitioner of  other religious faiths and Hindu  dissentients are some times as rigid adherents to the system  of caste  as the  conservative Hindus.  We  find Christian  harijans,  Christian  Madars,  Christian  Reddys, Christian Kammas,  Mujbi Sikhs,  etc. etc. In Andhra Pradesh there is  a community  known as Pinjaras or Dudekulas (known in the  North as  ’Rui Pinjane  Wala’): Professional cotton- beaters) who  are really  Muslims, but  are trated  in rural society, for  all practical  purposes,  as  a  Hindu.  caste Several other instances may be given.      Shared  situation  in  the  economic  hierarchy,  caste gradation, occupation,  habitation,  style  of  consumption, standard of  literacy and  a variety  of such  other factors appear  to   go  to  made  towards  social  and  educational backwardness. In  some situations  and indeed  quite  often, social investigator  may easily  be able to identify a whole caste group  as a socially and educationally backward class; he may readily recognise people living in certain areas, say

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 42 of 106  

mountainous, desert   or  forest regions,  as  socially  and educationally backward classes; he may freely perceive those pursuing  certain   ’Lowly’  accusations   as  socially  and educationally backward  classes: he may, without difficulty, distinguish the  very poor and the destitute as socially and educationally 401 backward classes.  The social investigator may be able to do all this  by field-reasearch. study, observation, collection and interpretation of data, application of common though not rigid standards.  We will  refer to  these  aspects  of  the question later in our judgment.      With these  prefatory, general observations, we may now refer to the relevant Constitutional provisions. Part XVI of the Constitution  concerns itself  with "Special  provisions relating to certain classes". The classes in regard to which the  constitution-makers   thought  fit   to  make   special provision are the Scheduled Caste, the Scheduled Tribes, the Anglo-Indian community  and the  socially and  educationally backwardness classes      Articles 330  and 332  provide for reservation of seats for Scheduled  Castes and  Scheduled Tribes  in the House of the People  and the  Legislative  Assembles  of  the  State. Articles 331  and 333  provide  for  representation  of  the Anglo-Indian Community  in the  House of  the People and the Legislative Assemblies  of the  States. Article 334 provides that the reservation and special representation are to cease after  30   years.  There   is  no  reservation  or  special representation  for   socially  and  educationally  backward classes either  in  the  House  of  the  People  or  in  the Legislative Assemblies of the State.      Article 335  imposes a constituently obligation to take into consideration  the claims  of members  of the Scheduled Castes and  Scheduled Tribes,  in the making of appointments to the  services and posts in connection with the affairs of the  Union   or  of   the  States,   consistently  with  the maintenance of  efficiency of  administration. Articles  336 and 337 make certain special provisions for the Anglo-Indian Community  in   certain  services   and  with   respect   to educational  grants  for  the  benefit  of  that  community. Article 341  empowers the  President, with  respect  to  any State  (after  consultation  with  the  Governor)  or  Union Territory, to  specify, by  public notification, the castes, the races  or tribes or parts or groups within castes, races or tribes which shall, for the purposes of the Constitution, be deemed  to be  Scheduled Castes in relation to that State or Union  Territory as  the case  may be.  A notification so issued  by  the  President  is  not  to  be  varied  by  any subsequent notification,  but may  only be  varied  by  law, made, by  Parliament. Article 342 makes a similar provisions with respect to Scheduled Tribes.      Article  340   empowers  the  President  to  appoint  a commission to  investigate the  conditions of  socially  and educational 402 ly backward  classes within  the territory of Indian and the difficulties  under   which  they   labour   and   to   make recommendations as  to the steps that should be taken by the Union to  remove such  difficulties  and  to  improve  their conditions and as to the grants that should be made for that purpose by  the Union  or by  the State.  The report  of the Commission which is to set out the facts and make  recommendations is required to be laid before each House of Parliament, together with a memorandum explaining the action taken thereon.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 43 of 106  

    Article  338  enjoins  the  appointment  of  a  special officer for the Scheduled Tribes by the President whose duty is to  investigate all  matters relating  to the  safeguards provided for  the Scheduled Castes and Schedule Tribes under the Constitution  and to  report to  the President  upon the working of  those safeguards  at such  intervals as  may  be directed by the President. The reports are to be laid before each House  of Parliament. Article 338(3) expressly provides that n  under Art.  338 references  to the  Scheduled Castes Scheduled  Tribes   shall  be   construed  as  in  including references to  such other  backward classes as the President may on receipt of the report of a Commission appointed under Art. 34a(1). specify and also the Anglo-Indian community.      Thus,  while   there  is   a  special   provision   for reservation of  seats for  Scheduled  Castes  and  Scheduled Tribes in  the House  of  the  People  and  the  Legislative Assemblies  of   the  States   and  a   provision  for   the representation of the Anglo-Indian Community in the House of the People  and the  Legislative Assemblies  of the  States, there is  no such  provision for reservation of seats for or reservation socially  and educationally  backward classes in the House of the People or the Legislative Assemblies of the States.  Again,   while  under   Art.  335,   there   is   a constitutional obligation  to consider  the  claims  of  the members of  the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the making of  appointments to  services and posts in connection with the  affairs of the Union and the States and there is a special provision  for the Anglo-Indian Community in certain services for  a limited  period. There  is no  corresponding provision  for   the  socially  and  educationally  backward classes. But  there is  a provision  under Art.  340 of  the Constitution  for   the  appointment   of  a  Commission  to investigate the  conditions of  socially  and  educationally backward classes  and to  recommend the steps to be taken to ameliorate such conditions. 403           Article 14 of the Constitution, stated in positive language, guarantees to every person equality before the law and equal  protection of  the laws,  Article 15(1) prohibits the State from discriminating against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.  Article  22(2)  similarly  prohibits  the  denial  of admission into any educational institution maintained by the State or receiving aid out of State funds on grounds only of religion, race,  caste, language  or any of them. While Art. 15(3) States that nothing in Art. 15 shall prevent the State from making  any special  provision for  women and children, Art. 15(4)  provides, "Nothing  in this Article or in clause (2) of  Art. 29  shall prevent  the State  from  making  and special provision  for  the  advancement  of  any  socially, educationally  backward  classes  of  citizens  or  for  the Scheduled Castes  or Scheduled  Tribes." Art.  16 deals with equality of  opportunity in  matters of  public  employment. Art.  16(1)   provides  that  there  shall  be  equality  of opportunity in matters relating employment or appointment to any  office  under  the  State,  and  Art.  16(2)  prohibits discrimination on  grounds only  of religion,  race,  caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence or any of them. Art. 16(4) States,  "nothing in  this Article  shall prevent  the State from  making any  provision  for  the  reservation  of appointments or  posts in  favour of  any backward  class of citizens  which,  in  the  opinion  of  the  "that,  is  not adequately represented  in the  services under the State. We are primarily concerned in this case with the question as to who are  socially  and  educationally  backward  classes  of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 44 of 106  

citizens mentioned  in Art.  15(4) and the backward class of citizens, not  adequately represented  in the services under the State mentioned in Art. 16(4).      We see  that while  Art. l  5(4) contemplates  "special provision  for   the  advancement   of  any   socially   and educationally  backward  classes  of  citizens  or  for  the Scheduled Castes  and  the  Scheduled  Tribes",  Art.  16(4) speaks of  ’provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in  favour of any backward class of citizens which, in the opinion  of the  State is  not adequately represented in services under the State"- Now, it is not suggested that the socially and  educationally backward classes of citizens and the Scheduled  Castes and  the Scheduled  Tribes  from  whom special provision  for advancement  is contemplated  by Art- 15(4) are distinct and separate from the backward classes of citizens who are adequately represents in the services under the State  for whom reservation of posts and appointments is contemplated  by   Art.  16(4).  ’The  backward  classes  of citizens’ referred  to in  Art.  16(4),  despite  the  short description, are the same 404 as  the  socially  and  educationally  backward  classes  of citizens and  the  A  scheduled  castes  and  the  Scheduled Tribe’, 90  fully described  in Art. 15(4): Vide Trilokinath Tiku v. State of Jammu and Kashmir and other cases. However, for the  purposes of Art. 16(4) it is further necessary that the Backward classes should not be adequate in the services. Again,  and   quite  obviously,   ’special   provision   for advancement’ is  a wide expression and may include many more things besides  ’mere reservation  of seats in colleges.’ It may  be  by  way  of  financial  assistance,  free  medical, educational  and   hostel  facilities,   scholarships,  free transport, concessional  or  free  housing,  exemption  from requirements insisted  upon in the case of other classes al- so on.  We are  not, for the time being, concerned with  the mode  advancement,   other  than  reservation  of  seats  in college, we observe that under Art. 16(4), reservation is to be made  to benefit  those  backward  classes,  who  in  the opinion of the Government are not adequately represented, in the services.  Reservation  must,  therefore,  be  aimed  at securing adequate  representation. It  must follow  that the extent  of   reservation  must   match  the   inadequacy  of representation.  There  is  no  reason  why  this  guideline furnished by  the Constitution  itself should  not  also  be adopted for the purposes Or Art. 15(4) too. For example, the extent of  reservation of seats in professional colleges may conveniently be  determined with reference to the inadequacy of representation  in the various profession. Similarly, the extent of  reservation in  other colleges  may be determined with reference to the inadequacy in the number of graduates, etc. Naturally,  if the  lost ground  is to  be gained.  the extent of  reservation may  even have  to be slightly higher than the percentage of population of the backward classes.      Since these  questions are  not altogether res integra, it will  be useful to refer to a few of the earlier opinions of this Court touching upon this question.             Until Thomas(1) came on the scene, Balaji(2) was considered by  many as  the  magnum  opus  on  reservations. Balaji was  also a  case  from  Karnataka.  The  very  first sentence of  the judgment  of a  Gajendragadkar,  J..  is  a revelation of  the frustrating  task that  the Government of Karnataka has  been undertaking  these  several  years.  The first sentence  says: "Since  1958, the  State of Mysore has been (l) [1976] 1 S.C.R. 906.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 45 of 106  

(2) [1963] Suppl. I S.C.R,4 39 405 endeavouring to make a special provision for the advancement of  the  socially  and  educationally  backward  classes  af citizens in  the State  A of  Mysore under Art. 15(4) of the Constitution and  every time when an order is passed in that behalf,  its   validity  has   been   challenged   by   writ proceedings. Four previous orders passed in that behalf were challenged by writ proceedings taken against the State under Art. 226".  Balaji was  concerned with  the question  of the validity of  the reservation  made under  Art. 15(4)  of the Constitution in  regard to admission to the medical colleges of the Mysore and Karnataka Universities. 28 per cent of the seats were  reserved  for  Backward  Classes  so-called,  20 percent for more Backward classes, 15 per cent for Scheduled Castes and  3 per  cent for Scheduled Tribes, making a total of 68  per cent  of the  seats available  for  the  reserved category only  and 32  per cent  for the  general  category, described in  the judgment  as "merit pool". The reservation was generally  made on  the basis of the report of the Nagan Gowda Committee appointed by the State Government. The court found  that   the  Committee   approached  the   problem  of enumerating and classifying these socially and educationally backward communities  on the  basis that social backwardness depended substantially  on the  caste to which the community belonged, though  it recognised  that economic condition may be a  contributing  factor.  according  to  the  court,  the Committee virtually  equated  ’classes’  with  castes’.  The court observed  that in  dealing with  the  question  as  to whether any class of citizens were socially backward or not, it might not be irrelevant to consider the caste of the said citizens  but   the  importance   of  caste  should  not  be exaggerated. rt  was observed  that caste  could not be made the  sole   or  dominant   test  to  determine-  the  social backwardness of  group or  classes of citizens. It was noted that social  backwardness was  in the  ultimate analysis the result of  poverty, to  a very  large extent.  It  was  also noticed  that   the  occupation   of  citizens   might  also contribute   to    make   classes   of   citizens   socially backwardness. As  the Nagam  Gowda Committee had adopted the caste test  as the  predominant test,  if not the sole test, without regard  to the  other factor- which were undoubtedly relevant, the  court expressed  the vice  the classification made by  the Committee  of socially backward communities was invalid. In  passing, at one place, it was remarked that the Backward Classes  of citizens for whom special provision was authorised to be made, were treated by Art. 15(4) itself, as being similar  to the  Scheduled Castes  and Tribes.  It was observed that  the Backward  Classes were  in the matters of their  backwardness   comparable  to  Scheduled  Castes  and Tribes. Based on these observations and the juxta 406 position of  the  expressions  Scheduled  Castes,  Scheduled Tribes and  A socially and educationally backward classes in Art. 15  and Art.  338, it  was  suggested  by  the  learned counsel  for  the  petitioner  that  the  socially  backward classes of  people were  those whose  status and standard of living was  very much  the same  as those  of the  Scheduled Castes and  Scheduled Tribes.  We do  not think  that  these observations were meant to lay down any proposition that the socially Backward  Classes were  those  classes  of  people, whose conditions  of life were very nearly the same as those of the  Scheduled Castes and Tribes. We say so first because of the  inappropriateness of  applying the ordinary rules of statutory  interpretations   to   interpret   constitutional

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 46 of 106  

instruments which  are sui  generies  and  which  deal  with situations of significance and consequence. It is not enough to exhibit  a Marshallian awareness that we are expounding a Constitution; we must also remember that we are expounding a Constitution born  in the  mid-twentieth century,  but of an anti-imperialist  struggle,   influenced  by  Constitutional instruments, events  and revolutions elsewhere, in search of a better world, and winded to the idea of justice,  economic,  social and political to all. such a Constitution must be  given a  generous interpretation  so as to give all its citizens the full measure of justice promised by it. The expositors of  the Constitution  are to  concern  themselves less with  mere words and arrangement of words than with the philosophy and  the prevading  ’spirit  and  sense’  of  the Constitution, so elaborately exposed for our guidance in the Directive Principles of State Policy and other provisions of the Constitution.  Now, anyone  acquainted  with  the  rural scene in India would at once recognise the position that the Scheduled Castes  occupy a  peculiarly degraded position and are treated,  not  as  persons  of  caste  at  all,  but  as outcastes. Even  the other  admittedly backward classes shun them and  treat them  as inferior  beings. It was because of the special  degradation to  which they  had been  subjected that the  Constitution itself  had to  come forward  to make special provision  for them. There is no point in attempting to determine  the social  backwardness of  other classes  by applying the test of nearness to the conditions of existence of the  Scheduled Castes.  Such  a  test  would  practically nullify the  provision  for  reservation  for  socially  and educationally Backward  Classes other  than Scheduled Castes and Tribes.  Such a  test would  perpetuate the dominance of the existing  upper  classes.  Such  a  test  would  take  a substantial majority  of the   classes  who are  between the upper classes and the Scheduled Castes and Tribes out of the category of  backward classes  and put  them at  a permanent disadvantage. Only  the ’enlightened’  classes of  body will capture all  the ’open’  posts and  seats and  the  reserved posts and 407 seats will  go to  the Scheduled Castes and Tribes and those very near the Scheduled Castes and Tribes. The bulk of those behind the   ’enlightened’  classes and  ahead of  the  near Scheduled Castes and Tribes would be left high and dry, with never a chance of imposing themselves .      Earlier we  mentioned that  poverty was regarded by the Court as the prime cause of social backwardness. It was said at  page  460,  "Social  backwardness  is  on  the  ultimate analysis the  result of poverty, to a very large extent. The classes of  citizens who  are deplorably  poor automatically become socially  backward. They  do not  enjoy a  status  in society and  have,  therefore,  to  be  content  to  take  a backward seat.  It is  true that  social backwardness  which results  from   poverty  is   likely  to  be  aggravated  by considerations of  caste to  which  the  poor  citizens  may belong, but  that only shows the relevance of both caste and poverty in  determining the  backwardness of  citizens".  We only add  that there  is an  overpowering mutuality  between poverty and  caste on  the Indian scene. Again, referring to some scheme  formulated by  the Maharashtra  Government  for financial assistance  the Court  observed, "However,  we may observe that  if any  State adopts  such a  measure, it  may afford relief  to and assist the advancement of the Backward Classes  in  the  State,  because  backwardness  social  and educational,  in   ultimately  and   primarily  duties   for proverty". Recognising  poverty as  the true  source of  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 47 of 106  

evil of  social and  economic backwardness  and caste  as  a relevant factor  in determining backwardness, the Court also noticed occupation  and habitation  as two  other  important contributing factors  and finally  stressed the  need for  a penetrating investigation. It was said,           "The occupations  of citizens  may also contribute      to make  classes of  citizens socially  backward. There      are some  occupations which  are  treated  as  inferior      according  to   conventional  beliefs  and  classes  of      citizens who follow these occupations are apt to become      socially backward.  The place  of habitation also plays      not a  minor part  in determining the backwardness of a      community of persons. In a sense, the problem of social      backwardness is  the problem of Rural India and in that      behalf,  classes   of  citizens  occupying  a  socially      backward position in rural area fall within the purview      of Art.  15(4). The  problem of  deter mining  who  are      socially backward  classes is undoubtedly very complex.      Sociological, social  and economic  considerations come      into play in solving the problem and 408      evolving proper  criteria for determining which classes      are A  socially backward  is obviously a very difficult      task. It  will  need  an  elaborate  investigation  and      collection of  data and  examining the  said data  in a      rational and scientific way".      The  Balaji   Court  then  proceeded  to  consider  the question  of   educational  backwardness.  The  Nagan  Gowda Committee had  dealt with  the question  on the basis of the average of  the student  population in  the last  three High school classes  of all High Schools in the State in relation to a  thousand citizens of that community. The Committee was of the  view that all castes whose average was less than the State average should be regarded as Backward communities and those whose  average was  less than 50 per cent of the State average should  be regarded as More Backward. The Court took the view  that the  adoption of  the test  of the last three High School  classes might  be a little high. but even if it was  not   considered  high,  it  was  not  right  to  treat communities which  were just  below the  State   average  as backward. There can be divergence of views on this question. Where the State average itself is abysmally low, there is no reason why  classes of  people whose  average  was  slightly above, or very near, or just below the State average, should be excluded  from the list of Backward Classes. The adoption of the State average or the 50 per cent of the State average test might  lead to  quite arbitrary results and This surely cannot be  a matter  in which the court should try to impose its views.      In fact while observing: "if the test has to be applied by a  reference to  the State average of student population, the legitimate  view to  take would  be that  the classes of citizens, whose  average is  well or substantially below the State average,  can be  treated as  educationally backward," the court  also observed,  ’ On  this point  again we do not propose to  lay down  any hard  and fast rule; it is for the State to consider the matter and decide in a manner which is consistent with the requirements of Art. 15(4)".      It  was   also  observed   in  Balaji   that  the  sub- classification  made   by  the   reservation  order  between Backward Classes  and More  Back ward Classes did not appear to be  justified under  Art. 15(4)  as it  appeared to  be a measure devised  to benefit  all the classes of citizens who were less  advanced when  compared with  the  most  advanced classes in  the State,  and that  was not  the scope of Art.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 48 of 106  

15(4). A result of the sub-classification was that nearly 90 per cent of the 409 population  of  the  State  was  treated  as  backward.  The propriety of  such a  course may  be open to question on the facts of  each case,  but A  we do  not see why on principle there cannot  be :3 classification into Backward Classes and More Backward  Classes, if  both Classes  are not  merely  a little behind,  but far far behind the most advanced classes In fact such a classification would be necessary to help the More Backward  Classes;  otherwise  those  of  the  Backward Classes who  might be  a little  more advanced than the More Backward Classes  might walk  away with  all the seats, just as, if reservation was confined to the More Backward Classes and no  reservation was  made to  the slightly more advanced Backward Classes  the most  advanced Classes would walk away with all  the  seats  available  for  the  general  category leaving none  for the  Backward Classes. All that we can say is that  sub-classification may  be permissible if there are classes of people who are definitely far behind the advanced classes but ahead of the very backward classes.      One may  say the  same thing  about the adoption of the average of  the student  population in  the last  three High School Classes  of all High Schools in the State in relation to a  thousand citizens  of that  community as the basis for assessing relative  Backwardness. Balaji  thought it  was  a little high  but surely  other views  are possible.  In fact considering the  wide spread  of elementary  education,  one would think  the basis  should be  pushed up  higher. Having regard to  the availability  of elementary  schools in rural areas, more and more boys of the backward Classes may become literate.  But   it  is  a  long  way  from  ceasing  to  be educationally backward.  As one goes up class by class it as a notorious  fact that  there are  more ’drop-outs’ from the boys of  the backward  classes than  from  the  boy  of  the forward classes.  The adoption  of a  lower basis  to assess educational backwardness  may give  a wholly  false picture. After all,  if one  is considering the question of admission to professional  colleges or  of appointment  to posts,  the basis possibly  should be  the average number of students of that community who have passed the examination prescribed as the minimum  qualification  for  admission  to  professional colleges, say  in the  last three  years,  and  perhaps  the average  number  of  persons  of  that  community  who  have graduated is  the last  three  years,  since  graduation  is generally the minimum qualification for most posts possibly, the extent  of reservation  may even  vary with reference to the class  of post.  This is  a  matter  for  evaluation  by experts. 410      The Balaji  Court then  considered the  question of the extent of   the  special provision  which the State would be competent to  make under  Art. 15(4). Here the Court brought in the so-called meritarian principle and thought that large reservation  would  inevitably  affect  efficiency.  We  may perhaps, mention  here what  a noted sociologist had to say: "So  the   leading  anti-reservationists  by  hand  to  find nationalizations for  their campaigns. A favourite one is to conjure up  the image of a phoney juxtaposition; on one side is ’merit’  shown up  by candidates on the open list, on the other side  is ’incompetence’,  represented b  those on  the reserved list Hence-so the argument runs-if reservations are maintained, standards  in the  medical  professions  (or  in other professions  and  senior  Government  posts)  will  be deleted. Indeed  (it is  claimed) there is serious risk that

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 49 of 106  

patients will  die if they are treated by (backward’ doctors who have reached their positions through reservations. (Such allegations  are   constantly  repeated  although  they  are patently false;  in the final at the postgraduate level, the minimum qualifying  marks are  identical for all candidates, irrespective of their origin.)"(’) We should think that is a matter for  experts in  management and administration. There might be  posts or technical courses for which only the best can be  admitted and  others might  be posts  and  technical courses for  which minimum  qualification would  also serve. The percentage  of reservations is not a matter upon which a court may  pronounce with no 1 material at hand. For a court to say  that reservations  should not exceed 40 per cent, 50 per cent  or  60  per  cent,  would  be  arbitrary  and  the Constitution does  not, permit us to be arbitrary. Though in the Balaji  case, the  court thought that generally and in a broad way  a special  provision should  be less  than 50 per cent, and  how much  less than 50 per cent would depend upon the relevant  prevailing circumstances  in  each  case,  the court confessed.  "In this matter again, we are reluctant to say definitely  what would  be a  proper provision to make." All that  the court  would  finally  say  was  that  in  the circumstances of  the case  before them, a reservation of 68 per  cent   was  inconsistent   with  Art.   15(4)  of   the Constitution. We  are    not  prepared  to  read  Balaji  as arbitrarily   laying down  50 per cent as the outer limit of reservation. What  precisely was  decided by Balaji has been summed up  by the  Court itself at page 471 of the S.C.R. in the following words: (1)  Ruth  Glass:  Divided  and  degraded:  the  downtrodden      people of India, (Monthly Review July-August) 1982. 411          "We have already noticed that the impugned order in the present case has categorised the Backward Classes on the sole basis  of  caste  A  which,  in  our  opinion,  is  not permitted by  Art. 15(4):  and we  have also  held that  the reservation of  68 per  cent made  by the  impugned order is plainly  inconsistent   with  the  concept  of  the  special provision authorised  by Art.  15(4). therefore,  it follows that the  impugned order  is a  fraud on  the Constitutional power conferred on the State by Art. 15(4)".      We must  repeat here,  what we  have said earlier, that there is  no scientific  statistical  data  or  evidence  of expert administrators who have made any study of the problem to support  the opinion  that reservation  in excess  Or 5() percent may  impair efficiency.  It is  a rule  of thumb and rules of  the thumb  are not for judges to lay down to solve complicated  sociological   and   administrative   problems. Sometimes,  it   is  obliquely   suggested  that   excessive reservation is  indulged in  as a  mere votecatching device. Perhaps so,  perhaps not.  One can  only say  ’out  of  evil cometh good’  and quicker  the redemption  of the  oppressed classes, so much the better for the nation. Our observations are not  intended to  show the  door to  genuine efficiency. Efficiency must  be a guiding factor but not a smokes-cream. All that  a Court  may legitimately  say is that reservation may h  not be excessive. It may not be so excessive as to be oppressive; it  may not be so high as to lead to a necessary presumption of unfair exclusion of everyone else.      In R.  Chiralekha v.  State of  Mysore,(’) the  Supreme Court   upheld   that   classification   of   socially   and educationally backward classes made on the basis of economic condition  and   occupation,  without  reference  to  caste. According to the Government order, a family whose income was Rs. 1200  per annum or less and persons or classes following

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 50 of 106  

occupations of agriculture petty business, inferior services crafts or other occupations involving manual labour, were in general, socially and educationally backward. The Government listed the  following occupations  as contributing to social backwardness;  (1)  actual  cultivators;  (2)  artisan;  (3) inferior services  (i.e. Class IV in Government Services and corresponding  class   or  service  in  private  employment) including  casual  labour;  and  (4)  any  other  occupation involving manual  labour. Th  is criteria was adopted by the Government as  a temporary  measure pending further detailed study. The  order did  not  take  into  consideration  as  a criterion  for  backwardness  the  caste  of  an  applicant. Relying heavily on Balaji, (1) [1964] 6 S.C.R.368. 412 the Mysore  High Court  held that  the scheme adopted by the Government  was  most  imperfect  as  in  their  opinion  in addition to  the occupation  and poverty  tests,  the  study should  have   adopted  the   caste  test  as  well  as  the "residence" test  in  making  the  classification.  It  also observed that  the decision in the Balaji case said that the caste basis  was undoubtedly  a relevant,  nay an  important basis in  deter mining the classes of backward Hindus but it should not  be made  the sole basis. Subba Rao, J., speaking for this  Court, explained  how the  Mysore High  Court  had misunderstood Balaji and observed:           "While this  Court  said  that  caste  is  only  a      relevant  circumstance   and  that  it  cannot  be  the      dominant test  in ascertaining  the backwardness  of  a      class of  citizens, the  High Court  said that it is an      important basis  in determining  the class  of backward      Hindus and  that the  Government  should  have  adopted      caste as one of the test. As the said observations made      by the  High Court  may lead  to some  confusion in the      mind of  the authority  concerned who  may be entrusted      with the duty of prescribing the rules for ascertaining      the backwardness  of classes  of  citizens  within  the      meaning of  Art. 15(4)  of the  Constitution, we  would      hasten to  make it  clear that caste is only a relevant      circumstance in  ascertaining  the  backwardness  of  a      class and  there is  nothing in  the judgment  of  this      Court which  precludes  the  authority  concerned  from      determining the  social  backwardness  of  a  group  of      citizens if  it can  do so  without reference to caste.      While  this   Court  has   not  included   caste   from      ascertaining the  backwardness of  a class of citizens,      it has  not made it one of the compelling circumstances      affording a  basis for the ascertaining of backwardness      of a  class. To  put it  differently, the  au-  thority      concerned  may   take  caste   into  consideration   in      ascertaining the  backwardness of  a group  of persons;      but, if  it does not, its order will not be bad on that      account, if  it can  ascertain the  backwardness  of  a      group  of   person  on  the  basis  of  other  relevant      criteria." Later he further proceeded to explain:-           "This interpretation  will carry out the intention      of the Constitution expressed in the aforesaid Article.      It  helps   the  really  backward  classes  instead  of      promoting the  interests of  individuals or groups who,      though they 413      belong to  a particular  caste a  majority where  of si      socially and educationally backward, really belong to a      class A  which is  socially and educationally advanced.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 51 of 106  

    To illust  rate, take  a caste  in  a  State  which  is      numerically the  largest therein. It may be that though      a majority of the people in that caste are socially and      educationally backward,  an effective  minority may  be      socially and  edu- cationally  for more  advanced  than      another small  sub-caste the  total number  of which is      far less  than the  said minority.  If we interpret the      expression "Classes"  as "caster  ’, the  object of the      Constitution will  be frustrated  and the people who do      not deserve  any advertitious  aid may  get it  to  the      exclusion of  those who  really deserve.  This  anomaly      will not  arise if,  without equating caste with class,      caste is  taken as  only one  of the  considerations to      ascertain whether  a person belongs to a backward class      or not.  On the other hand, if the entire sub-caste, by      and large,  is backwardness,  it may be included in the      Scheduled Castes by following the appropriate procedure      laid down by the Constitution".      Evidently recognising  the  difficulty  be-setting  any attempt by  a Court  to lay  down  inflexible  criteria,  he pointed out:           ’We do  not intend to lay down any inflexible rule      for the  Government  to  follow.  The  laying  down  of      criteria for  ascertainment of  social and  educational      backwardness of  a class is a complex problem depending      upon many  circumstances which  may vary  from State to      State and even from place to place in a State. But what      we  l?   intend  to   emphasize  is   that   under   no      circumstances a  "class" can  be equated  to a "caste",      though the  caste  of  an  individual  or  a  group  of      individual may  be considered along with other relevant      factors in  putting him in a particular class. We would      also like to make it clear that if in a given situation      caste is  excluded in  ascertaining a  class within the      meaning of  Art. 15(4) of the Constitution, it does not      vitiate  the   classification  if  it  satisfied  other      tests." In Rajendran  v. State  of Madras(l) Ramaswami, J. took care to say, (1) [1968] I S.C.R. 721. 414           ".. if  the reservation in question had been based      A only  on caste  and had  not taken  into account  the      social and  educational backwardness  of the  caste  in      question, it  would be  violative of  Art. 15(1) But it      must not  be for gotten that a caste is also a class of      citizens and  if the  caste as  a whole is socially and      educationally  backward  reservation  can  be  made  in      favour of  such a  caste on  the ground  that it  is  a      socially and  educationally backward  class of citizens      within the  meaning of  Art. 15(4) . .. It is true that      in  the   present  cases   the  list  of  socially  and      educationally backward  classes has  been specified  by      caste. But  that does  not necessarily means that caste      was the sole consideration and that person belonging to      these castes  are also  not a  class  of  socially  and      educationally backward citizens." In  State  of  Andhra  Pradesh  v.  P.  Sagar,(l)  Shah,  J. Observed,           "In the  context in which it occurs the expression      "class" means  a  homogeneous  section  of  the  people      ground together  because of  certain likeness or common      traits  and   who  are   identifiable  by  some  common      attributes such  as status, rank, occupation, residence      in  a   locality,  race,  religion  and  the  like.  In

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 52 of 106  

    determining whether a particular section forms a class,      caste  cannot   be  excluded  altogether.  But  in  the      determination of  a class  a test solely based upon the      caste   or   community   cannot   also   be   accepted-      ................................................... .......   Reservation     may  be  adopted  to  advance  the interests   of weaker  sections of society, but in doing so, case must  be taken  to see  that  deserving  and  qualified candidates  are   not  excluded  from  admission  to  higher educational institutions.  The criterion for determining the backwardness must  not be  based solely  on religion,  race, caste, sex  or place  of birth,  and the  backwardness being social and  educational must  be similar to the backwardness from which  the Scheduled  Castes and  the Scheduled  Tribes suffer". (1) [1998] 3 S.C.R. 595. 415          In Tirloki Nath v. State of Jammu & Kashmir,(l) the Court held  that while  it was  open to  the State to make a provision for reservation of appointments or posts in favour of socially and educationally backward classes, it could not distribute the  number of posts or appointments on the basis of  community  or  place  or  residence.  An  order  of  the Government of Jammu and Kashmir reserving 50 per cent of the vacancies for  the Muslims of Kashmir (entire State), 40 per cent for  the Jammu  Hindus and 10 per cent for the Kashmiri Hindus  was  struck  down.  It  was  pointed  out  that  the expression "backward  class" was not used as synonymous with backward caste  or backward  community but  it was  noticed, "The members  of an  entire caste  or community  may in  the social, economic  and educational scale of values at a given time be  backward and  may on  that account  be treated as a backward class,  but that is not because they are members of a caste  or community,  but because  they form a class". The Court further said:           In its ordinary connotation the expression "class"      means a  homogeneous  section  of  the  people  grouped      together  because   of  certain  likenesses  or  common      traits,  and   who  are  identifiable  by  some  common      attributes such  as status, rank, occupation, residence      in a locality, race, religion and the like. But for the      purpose of  Art. 16(4) in determining whether a section      forms  a  class,  a  test  1  solely  based  on  caste,      community, race,  religion, sex descent, place of birth      or  residence  cannot  be  adopted,  because  it  would      directly offend the Constitution".      In A.  Peeriakatuppan v.  State of  Tamil Nadu,(’)  the      Court observed:           "A caste  has always  been recognised  as a class.      there is  no  gain  saying  the  fact  that  there  are      numerous castes  in this country which are socially and      educationally backward. To ignore their existence is to      ignore the facts of life."      In State  of Andhra Pradesh v. Balaram(3), the order of the Government  of Andhra  Pradesh enumerating  the socially and      (1) [1969] 1 S.C.R. 103      (2) [1971] 1 S.C.C.38.      (3) A.l.R. 1972 S.C. 1375. 416 educationally backward  classes for the purpose of admission into the  A medical  colleges of  the State  had been struck down by  the High  Court on  the ground  that the Government Order was  based on  the  report  of  the  Backward  Classes Commission which  had adopted  caste as  the main  basis  to

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 53 of 106  

determine who were backward classes and this was contrary to the decision  of the  Court in Balaji. It had also been held by the  High Court  that  the  Commission  had  committed  a mistake in  adopting the  average of  student population per thousand of  a particular  class or community in the 10th or 11th classes  with reference  to the  State average  for the purpose of determining educational backwardness. Even so the percentage of  literacy of  some groups included in the list of backward  classes was  well above  the State average. The High Court  had further held that the Commission had ignored the principle  that the  social and educational backwardness of persons  classified in  the list  should be comparable or similar to  the Scheduled  Castes and  Scheduled Tribes- The Commission had  committed a  further mistake  in subdividing the groups  into more backward and less backward classes. It was urged  before this  Court that the principles thought to have been  laid down  in Balaji,  Chitralekha and Sagar that Art. 15(4)  was to  be read  as a proviso to Arts. 15(1) and 29(2) and  that in  the matter of backwardness that backward classes must be comparable to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, were  wrong and  required to  be re-considered.  The Court found  that it  was not necessary for them to consider this aspect  of the  matter as in the particular case before them, they  were factually satisfied that classes enumerated as  backward,   were  really   socially  and   educationally backward. The Court however took care to say:           "It must  be pointed  out that  none of  the above      decisions  lay   down  that   social  and   educational      backwardness must be exactly similar in all respects to      that of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. " The  contention that  backward classes  were classified on the basis of caste was met with the following observation:           "No doubt, we are aware that that any provision {I      made under  this clause must be within the well defined      limits and  should not  be on the basis of caste alone.      But it  should not  also be missed that a caste as such      may be  socially and  educationally backward.  If after      collecting 417      the necessary  data, it  is found  that the  caste as a      whole is  socially and  educationally backward,  in our      opinion, A  the reservation  made of  such persons will      have to  be up held notwithstanding the fact that a few      individuals in  that group  may be  both  socially  and      educationally above  the general  average. There  is no      gain saying  the fact that there are numerous castes in      the  Country,  which  are  socially  and  educationally      backward and  therefore a  suitable provision will have      to be  made by  the State as charge in Article 15(4) to      safeguard their interest.................... ............................................................ ............. the  members of  an entire  caste or community may in   the  social  economic,  and  educational  scale  of values, at  a given time be backward and may on that account be treated as backward classes, but that is not because they are members  of a caste of community but because they form a class. Therefore, it is clear that there may be instances of an  entire   caste  or   a  community   being  socially  and educationally backward  for being  considered  to  be  given protection under Art. 15(4)............................      ......................................................      To conclude,  though prima  facie the  list of Backward      Classes  which   is  under  attack  before  us  may  be      considered to  be on  the  basis  of  caste,  a  closer      examination  will   clearly  show   that  it   only   a

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 54 of 106  

    description  of  the  group  following  the  particular      occupations or professions, exhaustively referred to by      the Commission."      The Court  then proceeded  to observe that the question before them  was whether the Backward Classes Commission had relevant data  and material  before it  for enumerating  the classes of  persons to  be included  in the list of backward classes was  a real  question and not whether the Commission was  scientifically   accurate  in   conclusion.  The  Court expressed  its   satisfaction  that   there  was  sufficient relevant material to justify the Commission’s conclusion and added:-           "No doubt  there are  a few  instances  where  the      educational  average   is  slightly   above  the  State      average, but  that circumstance by itself is not enough      to strike  down the entire list. In fact, even there it      is seen  that  when  the  whole  class  in  which  that      particular group is included, is considered the average      works out to be less 418      than the State average. Even assuming there are a few A      categories which  are a little above the State average,      in literacy, that is a matter for the State to be taken      note of  and review  the position of such categories of      persons and take a suitable decision." Referring to  the observations  in Balaji regarding the test of average  student population  in the last three High Court School classes it was said:           "These observations  made by  this  Court  in  the      above decisions  have, in  our opinion, been misapplied      by the High Court to the case in hand. lt has proceeded      on the  basis that it is axiomatic that the educational      average of  the class  should not  be calculated on the      basis of  the student population in the last three high      school  classes  and  that  only  those  classes  whose      average is below the State average, that can be treated      as  educationally   back  ward.  This  Court  has  only      indicated the  broad principles to be kept in view when      making the provision under Art. 15(4)."      In Janki Prasad Parimoo v. State of Jammu & Kashmir the Court noticed  the link  between economic  backwardness  and social and educational backwardness and observed  -           "In India,  social and educational backwardness is      further associated with economic backwardness and it is      observed  in  Balaji’s  case  referred  to  above  that      backwardness, socially  and educationally is ultimately      and primarily due to poverty." Having said  this the  Court was  not prepared  to lay  down poverty as  the exclusive  test on  the ground  that a large proportion of  the population  in India was poverty stricken and if  poverty was  made the  sole test  for reservation, a resourceless situation might arise. It was said,           "But if  poverty is  the exclusive  test,  a  very      large proportion  of the population in India would have      to be  regarded as  socially and educationally backward      and if  reservations are  made only  on the  ground  of      economic 419      considerations,  an   untenable  situation   may  arise      because  even   in  sectors  which  are  recognised  as      socially and  educationally advanced,  there are  large      pockets of  poverty. In this country except for a small      percentage of  the population, the people are generally      poor-some being more poor, others less poor. Therefore,      when a  social investigator  tries to identify socially

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 55 of 106  

    and educationally  backward classes  he may  do it with      confidence that  they are  bound to be poor. Though the      two wards,  ’Socially’  and  ’educationally’  are  used      cumulatively  for   the  purpose   of  describing   the      backwardness class,  one may  find that if a class as a      whole is  educationally advanced,  it is generally also      socially advanced  because of the reformative effect of      education on  that  class.  The  words  "advanced"  and      "backward" are  only relative terms-there being several      layers  or   strata  of   classes,   hovering   between      "advanced" and  "backward", and  the difficult  task is      which class  can be  recognised out  of  these  several      layers as being socially and educationally backward."      The State  of Jammu  & Kashmir had declared six classes of citizens  as socially  and educationally  backward.  They were (1) persons whose traditional occupation was one of the sixty-two mentioned;  (2) persons  belonging  to  23  social castes; (3)  small cultivators  (4) low paid pensioners; (5) residents  in  areas  adjoining  the  cease-fire  line;  (6) persons belonging  to "bad  pockets". The  court found  that some  of  the  sixty-two  enumerated  occupations  were  not traditional occupations  at all  and that that list required review. The  court also  found that  19 out of the 23 castes had been  identified by  the  Committee  as  suffering  from social disabilities  and also educationally and economically backward. In  the case  of the  remaining four castes, there was nothing  to indicate  that they  were backward  classes. Referring to the third category of small cultivators, it was observed that  they could  not be  said to be ’a homogeneous social  section   of  the  people  with  common  trades  and identifiable by  some common  attributes’. All that could be said about  them was  that they cultivated or lived on land. Similarly in  regard to the fourth category, it was observed that they also do not belong to a homogeneous section of the people, the  only thing  common between them being that they had retired  from Government service. In regard to the fifth and  sixth   category  the   court  observed  that  lack  of communication, inaccessibility, lack 420 of material  resources, primitive living conditions and such considerations  made   the  people  living  in  those  areas socially and educationally backward.      In State  of Uttar  Pradesh v.  Pradeep Tandon,(1)  the Court recognised  poverty as  a relevant factor but observed that it  was not  the determining  factor  discovering  poor socially and  educationally backward  classes. Even  so  the backwardness of  the hill  and  Uttrakhand  areas  in  Uttar Pradesh was sustained on economic basis. It was said,           "The Hill  and Uttrakhand  areas in  Uttar Pradesh      are instances  of socially  and educationally  backward      classes of  citizens for those reasons. Backwardness is      judged by  economic basis  that each region has its own      measurable possibilities  for the  maintenance of human      numbers, standards  of living  and fixed property. From      an economic  point of  view the classes of citizens are      backward  when  they  do  not  make  effective  use  of      resources. When  large areas of land maintain a sparse,      disorderly and  illiterate population whose property is      small and negligible the element of social backwardness      is observed.  When effective territorial specialisation      is  not   possible  in   the  absence   Of   means   of      communication and  technical processes  as in  the hill      and Uttrakhand  areas the  people are socially backward      classes of citizens. Neglected opportunities and people      in remote  places raise walls of social backwardness of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 56 of 106  

    people."           "Educational  backwardness   is  ascertained  with      reference  to   those  factors.   Where   people   have      traditional apathy  for education  on account of social      and   environ   mental   conditions   or   occupational      handicaps,  it   is  an   illustration  of  educational      backwardness.  The   hill  and   Uttrakhand  areas  are      inaccessible. There is lack of educational institutions      and educational aids. People in the hill and Uttrakhand      areas illustrate  the educationally backward classes of      citizens because  lack of  educational facilities  keep      them stagnant  and they have neither meaning and values      nor awareness for education."      (1) [1975] 1 S.C.R. 761, 421 The Court  struck down  the reservation  for candidates from rural areas  on  the  ground  that  rural  population  which constituted 80%  of A  the population of the State could not be a homogeneous class. Some people in the rural areas might be educationally  backward, some might be socially backward, there may  be few  who were  both socially and educationally backward but it could not be said that all citizens residing in rural areas were socially and educationally backward.      The Court while noticing the difficulty of defining the expression ’socially’  and ’educationally’  backward classes of citizens  allowed itself  to make  the observation,  "the traditional   unchanging   occupations   of   citizens   may contribute to social and educational backwardness. The place of habitation  and its  environment is  also  a  determining factor in judging the social and educational backwardness."      In K.S.  Jayasree v.  State of  Kerala,(l) what  was in question  was   a  Government  Order  specifying  that  only citizens who were members of families which had an aggregate income of  less than  Rs. 6,000 per annum and which belonged to the caste and community mentioned in the annexures to the Government Order would constitute socially and educationally backward classes  for the  purposes of Art. 15(4). The Court upheld the order and held:           "In ascertaining social backwardness of a class of      citizens it may not be irrelevant to consider the caste      of the  group of citizens. Caste cannot however be made      the sole  or dominant  test. Social  backwardness is in      the ultimate  analysis the result of poverty to a large      extent. Social  backwardness which results from poverty      is likely  to be  aggravated by considerations of their      caste. This  shows the  relevance  of  both  caste  and      poverty in  determining the  backwardness of  citizens.      Poverty by  itself is  not the  determining  factor  of      social backwardness. Poverty is relevant in the context      of social  backwardness. The  commission found that the      lower   income    group   constitutes    socially   and      educationally  backward   classes.  The  basis  of  the      reservation is  not income  but social  and educational      backwardness  determined   on  the  basis  of  relevant      criteria. If any classification of backward classes of (1) [1976] 3 S.C.C. 730. 422 citizens is  based solely  on the  caste of  the citizen, it will A  perpetuate the  vice of  caste system. Again, if the classification is  based solely  on poverty,  it will not be logical................................. ................................  .................   Social backwardness which  results from  poverty is  likely  to  be magnified by  caste considerations.  Occupations,  place  to habitation may  also be  relevant factors in determining who

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 57 of 106  

are socially  and educationally backward classes. Social and economic considerations  came into  operation in solving the problem and  evolving the  proper  criteria  of  determining which    classes     are    socially    and    educationally backward.................................................... .................................................        The problem of  determining who  are socially and  educationally backward classes is undoubtedly not simple. Sociological and economic considerations  come into  play in  evolving proper criteria for  its determination. This is the function of the State. The  Court’s jurisdiction  is to  decide whether  the tests                      applied                       are valid....................................................... ............................................................ ....If  the classification is based solely on caste  of  the citizen, it  may not  be logical. Social backwardness is the result of  poverty to a very large extent. Caste and Poverty are both  relevant for  determining  the  backwardness.  But neither  caste   alone  nor   poverty  alone   will  be  the determining                                            tests ............................................................ ............................................................ ........  Therefore,   socially and  educationally  backward classes of  citizens in Article 15(4) cannot be equated with castes. In  R. Chitralekha  v. State  of Mysore [1964] 6 SCR 368 AIR 1964 SC 1823 this Court said that the classification of  backward   classes  based  on  economic  conditions  and occupations does not offend Article 15(4)."      State    of  Kerala  v.  N.M.  Thomas(1)  is  a    very important case decided by a bench of seven judges consisting of Ray,  C.J., Khanna,  Mathew, Beg. Krishna Iyer, Gupta and Murtaza  Fazal   Ali,  JJ.).  The  question  was  about  the exemption given  to  members  of  the  Scheduled  Caste  and Scheduled Tribes, for a limited period, from passing a (1) [1976] 1 S.C.R. 906. 423 certain departmental  test to qualify for promotion from the post of  Lower Division  Clerk to the post of Upper Division Clerk. The  rule A  providing for the exemption was attacked on the  ground that  it was  violative of Art. 16(1). One of the arguments  in support  of the attack was that the result of application of the rule would be to enable the members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes to claim more than 50% of  the posts  immediately available  for promotion. The rule was  upheld by Ray, C.J., Mathew, Beg, Krishna Iyer and Murtaza Fazal  Ali, JJ. and struck down by Khanna and Gupta, JJ. Ray, C.J. Observed that the equality of opportunity took within  its   fold  "all  stages  of  service  from  initial appointment  to  its  ,  termination  including  promotion". Articles 14  and 16(1)  would not  be violated  by the  rule which  would   ensure  equality  of  representation  in  the services for  unrepresented classes,  after  satisfying  the basic needs  of efficiency  of administration. A rule giving preference to  an underrepresented  backward community would not contravene  Arts. ]4,  61(1) and  16(2).  Article  16(4) merely removed any doubt in that respect. The classification of employees  belonging to  Scheduled Castes  and  Scheduled Tribes for allowing them an extended period of two years for passing the  special tests  for promotion  was  a  just  and reasonable  classification  having  rational  nexus  to  the object of  providing equal  opportunity for  all citizens in matters relating  to employment  or  appointment  to  public office. All  legitimate methods were available to strive for equality of opportunity in service under Art. 16(1). Article 16(4) enacted  one of  the methods  for  achieving  equality

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 58 of 106  

embodied in  Art. 16(1). Dealing with the arguments that the rule  exceeded  the  permissible  limits  of  the  resulting preference shown to Scheduled Castes. Ray, C.J.. Observed:           "The High Court was wrong in basing its conclusion      that the  result of  application of  the impeached Rule      and the orders are excessive and exorbitant namely that      out of  51 posts,  34 were  given to the members of the      Schedule  led   Castes  and   Scheduled   Tribes.   The      promotions made  in the service as a whole are no where      near 50  per cent  of the  total number  of posts.  The      Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes constitute 10 per      cent of  the State’s  population. Their  share  in  the      gazetted service  of the State is said to be 2 per cent      184 out  of 8,700.  Their  share  in  the  non-gazetted      appointments is  only 7  per cent  namely 11,437 out of      1,62,784. It  is, therefore,  correct that Rule 13A and      the orders are meant to implement 424      not only  the direction  under Art.  335, but  also the      Directive principal under Art. 46."      One other  important statement  in Ray, CJ. ’s judgment is worth  noticing. He said, "Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are  not a  caste  within  the  ordinary  meaning  of caste". He  referred Bhaiyalal  v. Harikishan  Singh were it had been  held that  an enquiry was not permissible into the question whether a particular caste was a Scheduled Caste or not in view of the provision of Art. 341.      Mathew, J. who agreed with the conclusions of Ray, CJ., observed that  resort to some sort of proportionate equality was necessary  in many  spheres to achieve justice. Equality of opportunity  was not simply a matter of legal equally, it depended not  merely on the absence of disability but on the presence of  abilities. The  Government has  an  affirmative duty to  eliminate inequalities and to provide opportunities for the  exercise of human rights and claims. The Government has  an   affirmative  responsibility   for  elimination  of inequalities, social,  economic or  otherwise. There  was no reason for  the court  not to  require the  State to adopt a standard of  proportional equality which took account of the differing  conditions   and  circumstances  of  a  class  of citizens whenever  those conditions  and circumstances stood in the  way of  their equal access to the enjoyment of basic rights and  claims. Art.  16(4) was not an exception of Art. 16(1). It was an emphatic way of putting the extent to which the equality  of opportunity could be carried, viz., even up to the  point of  making reservation. The state was entitled to  adopt   by  measure   which  would  ensure  an  adequate representation of  the members  of the  Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and justify it as a compensatory measure to ensure equality  of opportunity provided the measure did not dispense  with   the  acquisition   of  the   minimum  basic qualification    necessary    for    the    efficiency    of administration.  Beg,   J.  expressly   agreeing  with   the conclusions of  Ray, CJ.,  Mathew, Krishna  Iyer and  S.  M. Fazal  Ali,  JJ,  added  that  the  protection  of  Art.  16 continued  through   out   the   period   of   service.   He distinguished Devasana  and Balaji on the ground that if the overall position  and picture  was  taken  into  account  by taking  the   number  of   employees   in   all   Government departments, the so-called favoured class of employees would be less than 50 per cent of the number of posts.      Beg, J.,  however, thought that Art. 16(4) was designed ’to  reconcile   the  conflicting   pulls  of   Art.   16(1) representing the dynamics 425

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 59 of 106  

of justice,  conceived of  as equality  in conditions  under which candidates  actually compete  for posts  in Government service, and  of Arts.  A 46 and 335 embodying the duties of the State  to promote  the  interest  of  the  economically, educationally and  socially backward  so as  to release them from the clutches of social injustice’. According to Beg, J. the encroachments  on the  field of Art. 16(1) could only be permitted to  the extent  they were  warranted by Art. 16(4) and to  read broader  concept of social justice and equality into Art. 16(1) might stultify the provision itself and make Art. 16(4)  otiose. We must straight away demur. There is no reason whatever  to narrow  the concept  of equality in Art. 16(1) and  refuse to read into it broader concepts of social justice and  equality. In fact, it is necessary to read Art. 16(1) so  as not to come into any conflict with Arts. 46 and 335. A  constitutional document must be read as to synthesis its provisions  and avoid  disharmony. To  say that equality also means that unequals cannot be treated equally is merely to say  what is  self-evident  and  common  place.  Art.  14 implies it  and we  do not see why it is not implied in Art. 16(1) also.  True, on  a first glance, Art. 16(4) appears to save the  power of  the State  to  make  provision  for  the reservation of  appointments and  posts  in  favour  of  any backward class  of citizens, but a second look shows that it really recognises  a pre-existing  power and  expresses  the recognition in  an emphatic  way lest  there should  be  any doubt caste upon that power. Such a device is not unknown to legislatures and  constitution making  bodies. Art. 16(4) is more in  the nature of a rule of interpretation to guide the construction of  Aft. 16(1). The possibility of interpreting Art 16(1) so as to promote the narrower equality rather than the greater equality is excluded by Art. 16(4).      Krishna Iyer,  J., while upholding the validity of Rule 13AA made  it quite  clear that  Art. 16(4) was to be viewed not as  a saving  clause but as a clause inserted in Art. 16 due to  the over-anxiety  of the  draftsman to  make matters clear beyond possibility of doubt. He was emphatic that Art. 16 applied  to appointments  and pro-  motions as  well.  He expressed his agreement with Fazal Ali, J. that arithmetical limit of 50 per cent in one year set by some earlier rulings could not be pressed too far and that overall representation in a  department did  not depend  on the  recruitment  in  a particular year,  but the  total strength of a cadre He also agreed with  Fazal Ali,  J’s construction  of Art. 16(4) and his view  about the  ’carry forward’ rule. But we must point out that  Krishna Iyer,  J. also  made certain  observations indicating that he too fell into the elitist 426 trap  of   viewing  the   question  as  one  of  ’protective discrimination’.  A  The  question  to  which  he  addressed himself  was   ’Is   Rule   (13AA)   valid   as   protective discrimination to  the Heartiness’.  Viewing the question in that light,  he proceeded  to utter  some words of purported caution about the fills of reservation. He aid,           A word  of sociological  caution. In  the light of      experience,  here   and   elsewhere   the   danger   of      ’reservation’, it  seems  to  me,  is  three-fold.  TLC      benefits, by  and large,  are snatched  away by the top      creamy layer  of the  ’back ward’  caste or class, thus      keeping the  weakest among  the weak  always  weak  and      leaving the fortunate layers to consume the whole cake.      Secondly, this  claim is  over played  extravagantly in      democracy by  large and  vocal groups  whose burden  of      backwardness has  been substantially  lightened by  the      march of time and measures of better education and more

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 60 of 106  

    opportunities  of  employment  but  wish  to  wear  the      ’weaker section’  label as  a means to score over their      near-equals formally categorised as the upper brackets.      Lastly, a  lasting solution  to the  problem comes only      from   improvement   of   social   environment,   added      educational  facilities   and  cross-fertilisation   of      castes  by   inter-caste  and   inter-class   marriages      sponsored  as  a  massive  State  programme,  and  this      solution is calculatedly hidden from view by the higher      ’backward’ groups  with a  vested interest in the plums      of  backwardness.  But  social  science  research,  not      judicial impressionism, will alone tell the whole truth      and a  constant process of objective re-evaluation of a      progress registered  by the  ’under dog’  categories is      essential lest a once deserving ’reservation’ should be      degraded into ’reverse discrimination’."      One cannot  quarrel  with  the  statement  that  social science research  and not judicial impressionism should form the basis  of  examination,  by  Courts,  of  the  sensitive question of  reservation for  backward classes.  Earlier  we mentioned  how   the  assumption  that  efficiency  will  be impaired if  reservation exceeds 50 per cent, if reservation is extended  to promotional  posts or  if the  carry forward rule is  adopted, is  not based  on any scientific data. One must, however,  enter a  caveat to  the criticism  that  the benefits of  reservation are  often snatched away by the top creamy layer  of backward  class or caste. That a few of the seats and posts reserved for backward classes are 427 snatched away by the more fortunate among them is not to say that reservation  is not  necessary. This is bound to happen in  a   competitive  society  such  as  ours.  Are  not  the unreserved seats  and posts  snatched away, in the same say, by the  top creamy  layer on society itself ? Seats reserved for the  backward classes  are taken  away by the top layers amongst them  on the same principle of merit it on which the unreserved seats  are  taken  away  by  the  top  layers  of society. How  can it  be bad if reserved seats and posts are snatched away  by the  creamy layer  of backward classes, if such snatching  away of  unreserved posts  by the top creamy layer of  society it  self not  bad?  This  is  a  necessary concomitant of  the very  economic and  social system  under which we  are functioning.  The privileged  in the  whole of society snatch away the unreserved prizes and the privileged among the  backward classes snatch away the reserved prizes, This does  not render  reservation itself  bad. But  it does emphasis that  mere reservation  of a percentage of seats in colleges and  a percentage  of posts  in the services is not enough to  solve the  problem of backwardness. Developmental facility and  opportunity must  be  created  to  enable  the really backward  to take  full advantage of reservations. It indicates that  the ultimate solution lies in measures aimed firmly at  all round  economic and social development. There is, of course, the danger that it engenders self-denigration and backwardness  may become  a vested interest. The further real danger  is  not  reservation  but  reservation  without general all  round  social  and  economic  development.  The result of  such reservation  is that  all the  young men  of merit belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Backward classes are literally  ’gobbled up’  by the  civil services  leaving very few  educated young  men of those classes to make their cause on the social, economic and political fronts. The very constraints of  office restrain  those who have become civil servants from championing the cause of their brethern. There is also  the historical  truth that  oppressed  persons  who

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 61 of 106  

improve their  lot, in  an effort to forget an unhappy past, often, rush to join the elite and imitate their ways, habits and thoughts.  In the process they tend to forget their less fortunate brethern.      Fazal Ali,  J.  expressed  his  satisfaction  that  the classification made  by the  Government by  Rule 13(AA)  was fully justified by Art. 16 of the Constitution- He held that Art. 16(4)  was not  to  be  read  in  isolation  or  as  an exception to  Art 16(1),  but was  to be  read as  part  and parcel of  Art 16(1)  and (2).  Dealing with the question of the  COCKADED   excessive   reservation,   he   emphatically observed, 428           "This means  that the reservation should be within      A the  permissible limits  and should not be a cloak to      till all  the posts  belonging to a particular class of      citizens  and   thus  violate   Art.   16(1)   of   the      Constitution indirectly. At the same time clause (4) of      Art. 16  does not  fix any  limit on  the power  of the      Government to  make reservation.  Since clause (4) is a      part of Art. 16 of the Constitution it is manifest that      the State  cannot be  allowed to  indulge in  excessive      reservation so  as to  defeat the  policy contained  in      Art. 16(1).  As to what would be a suitable reservation      within permissible  limits will  depend upon  the facts      and circumstances  of each  case and  no hard  and fast      rule can  be laid  down, nor can this matter be reduced      to a mathematical formula so as to be adhered to in all      cases. Decided  cases of  this Court have no doubt laid      down that  the percentage  of  reservation  should  not      exceed 50  per cent.  As t  read the authorities, this,      is, however, a rule of caution and does not exhaust all      categories. Suppose  for instance  a State  has a large      number  of   back  ward   classes  of   citizens  which      constitute 80  per cent of the jobs for them, can it be      said that  the percentage  of reservation  is  bad  and      violates the  permissible limits  of clause (4) of Art.      16 ?  The answer  must necessarily  be in the negative.      The dominant  object of this provision is to take steps      to make inadequate representation adquate."      Fazal Ali,  J. mext  considered  the  validity  of  the ’carry forward’ rule and upheld that rule also. He said that if in  fact the  carry forward  rule was  not allowed  to be adopted, it  might result  in  inequality  to  the  backward classes of citizen.      Thus, we  see that  all five judges who constituted the majority were  clear that  Art. 16  applied to all stages of the  service   of  a  civil  servant,  from  appointment  to retirement, including  promotion. Four  out of  seven judges Ray C.J.,  Beg, Krishna Iyer and Fazal Ali JJ., were also of the clear  view that  the so-called fifty percent rule would apply to the total number of posts in the service and not to the  number  of  posts  filled  up  at  different  times  on different occasions. The reservation in appointments made on any single  occasion might well exceed 50 per cent. Four out of seven  judges, Ray,  CJ., Mathew,  Krishna Iyer and Fazal Ali, JJ., further expressed the view that Art. 429 16(4) was  not an  exception to Art. 16(1) and it was merely an emphatic  way of  stating that reservation was one of the modes of  A achieving  equality for  the backward  class  of citizens.      In Akhil  Bharativa Soshit Karamchari Sangh v. Union of India &  Ors.,(l) the  Court had to consider the question of reservation of  posts under the State in favour of Scheduled

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 62 of 106  

Castes and Scheduled Tribes and the ’carry forward rule. The reservation and  the rule  were upheld  by the court. One of the arguments  vigorously advanced  was the  usual plea that efficiency  would  suffer.  Krishna  Iyer,  J.  meeting  the argument observed:           "The sting  of the argument against reservation is      that it  promotes inefficiency  in  administration,  by      choosing  sub-standards  candidates  in  preference  to      those with  better mettle.  Competitive skill  is  more      relevant  in   higher  posts,  especially  those  where      selection is  made by  competitive examinations. Lesser      classes  of   posts,   where   promotion   is   secured      mechanically by  virtue of  seniority except  where the      candidate is  unfit. do  not require  a high  degree of      skill as  in the case of selection posts. (See [1968] I      SCR p.  721 at  734). It  is obvious  that  as  between      selection and  non-selection posts the role of merit is      functionally more  relevant in  the former  than in the      latter. And  if in Rangachari reservation has been held      valid in  the case of selection posts, such reservation      in non-selection  posts is  an afortiori  case. If,  in      selecting top  officers you may reserve posts for SC/ST      with lesser  merit, how  can you  rationally argue that      for  the  posts  of  peons  or  lower  division  clerks      reservation  will   spell  calamity?   The  part   that      efficiency plays  is far  more in  the case  of  higher      posts than  in the  appointments of the lower posts. On      this approach Annexure K is beyond reproach."           "Trite arguments about efficiency and inefficiency      are a  trifle phoney  because, after all, at the higher      levels the heartiness harijans girijan appointees are a      microscopic percentage  and even in the case of Classes      III and  II posts they are negligible. The preponderant      majority  coming   from  unreserved   communities   are      presumably efficient  and the  dilution  of  efficiency      caused by the minimal induction of      (1) [1981] 1 S.C.R.. 185. 430      a small  percentage of  ’reserved’  candidates,  cannot      affect   the    over-all   administrative    efficiency      significantly. Indeed, it will be gross exaggeration to      visualise a collapse of the Administration because 5 to      10 per  cent of  the total  number of  officials in the      various classes  happen to  be sub-standard.  Moreover,      care has  been taken  to give  in service  training and      coaching to correct the deficiency."      While we  agree that  competitive skill  is relevant in higher posts,  we  do  not  think  it  is  necessary  to  be apologetic about  reservations in  posts, higher or lower so long as the minimum requirements are satisfied. On the other hand, we  have to  be apologetic  that there  still exists a need for  reservation. Earlier  we extracted  a passage from Tawney’s Equality where he bemoaned how degrading it was for humanity to  make  much  of  their  intellectual  and  moral superiority to  each other.  Krishna  Iyer,  J.  Once  again emphasised that  Art. l  6(4) was  one facet  of the  multi- faceted character of the central concept of equality. One of us (Chinnappa  Reddy, J.),  in the  same case, explained how necessary it  was to translate the constitutional guarantees given to  the Scheduled  Castes, Scheduled  Tribes and other backward classes  in to reality by necessary State action to protect and nuture those classes of citizens so as to enable them to  shake off  the heart-crushing  burden of a thousand years’ deprivation  from their shoulders and to claim a fair proportion of  participation in  the administration.  It was

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 63 of 106  

pointed out  that Art.  16(4) in  truth flowed  out of  Art. 16(1). It was said,           "Art. 16(4)  is not  in the nature of an exception      to Art.  16(1). It  is a  facet  of  Art.  16(1)  which      fosters  and   furthers  the   idea  of   equality   of      opportunity  with   special  reference   to  an   under      privileged and  deprived  class  of  citizens  to  when      egalite do  droit (formal  or legal  equality)  is  not      egalite de  fait (practical or factual equality). It is      illustrative of  what the State must do to wipe out the      distinction between  egalite de  droit and  egalite  de      fait, It  recognises that  the  right  to  equality  of      opportunity includes  the right of the under-privileged      to conditions  comparable to  or compensatory  of those      enjoyed by  the privileged Equality of opportunity must      be such  as to yield ’Equality of Results’ and not that      which simply  enables people, socially and economically      better placed,  to win against the less fortunate, even      when the  competition is  itself  otherwise  equitable.      John Rawls in ’A, 431      Theory of  Justice’ demands the priority of equality in      a distributive  sense and  the setting up of the Social      System  "so  that  no  one  gains  or  loses  from  his      arbitrary place  in the  distribution of natural assets      or his  own initial  position in society without giving      or receiving  compensatory advantages  in return."  His      basic principle  of  social  justice  is:  "All  social      primary  goods-liberty   and  opportunity,  income  and      wealth, and  the  bases  of  self-respect-  are  to  be      distributed equally  unless an  unequal distribution of      any or all these goods is to the advantage of the least      favoured."  One   of  the  essential  elements  of  his      conception of  social justice  is  what  he  calls  the      principle of  redress:  "This  is  the  principle  that      undeserved inequalities  call for  redress,  and  since      inequalities  of   birth  and   natural  endowment  are      underserved,  these  inequalities  are  somehow  to  be      compensated for".  Society must,  therefore, treat more      favorably those with fewer native assets and those born      into less favorable social positions."      The statement  that equality  of opportunity must yield equality of  results was the philosophical foundation of the fulfillment of Art. 16(1) in Art. 16(4).      So we  have now noticed the historical and sociological background of  Class and  Caste, the  philosophy, the reason and the  rhetoric behind  reservation and  anti-reservation, the  Constitutional  provisions  and  the  varying  judicial stances.  What   emerges  from   these  three   decades   of Parliamentary, Executive, Judicial, Political, and practical wisdom? Clearly there exist large sections of people who are socially  and   educationally  backward,  who  stand  midway between the such as forward classes the landed, the learned, the priestly and the trading classes on the one side and the out-caste and  depressed classes,  i.e. the Scheduled Castes and the  Scheduled Tribes  on  the  other.  Poverty,  Caste, occupation and  habitation are  the principal  factors which contribute to  brand  a  class  as  socially  backward.  The customs which  they honour  and observe,  the rituals  which they fear  and practice  the habits  to which they adapt and conform, the  festivals which  they enjoy  and celebrate and even the  Gods that they revere and worship are enlightening elements  in   recognising  their   social   gradation   and backwardness- For instance, it may be possible 432

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 64 of 106  

to demonstrate  that amongst  very many  classes, castes  or communities, considered  socially inferior,  Child  marriage persists to  this day  despite the  Child Marriage Restraint Act and  the Hindu Marriage Act. Despite the wisdom of legal pandits and  learned text  books on  Hindu Laws  proclaiming that Saptapadi  is essential  to a vaid Hindu Marriage, most of the  socially inferior  classes rarely  follow the  rule; they have  their own  customs and  rituals. Long  before the Hindu Widows’  Re-marriage Act  permitted widows to remarry, long before  the Hindu  Marriage Act  permitted divorce, the custom of the several so called socially inferior classes or communities permitted re-marriage of widows and divorce. The divorce was  not by decree of a Court of Law but was granted by a  Caste Panchayat.  The    Caste-Panchayat  divorce  was impermissible   and    remarriage   of   widows   was   also impermissible among  the socially  superior classes who used to look  down upon  these customs as primitive. The socalled inferior classes  did not and do not have recourse either to Purohits to  perform marriages  or the  Courts  to  dissolve them.      Dress habits also throw light, while it is difficult to imagine, persons  belonging to  upper caste  or occupational groups going about their daily work bare-lacked it is not an uncommon right  to see  persons belonging  to lower caste or occupational groups  so going  about, Work habits also given an indication. Women belonging to higher social groups would not generally  care to  serve in  other  people’s  homes  or fields. Again  children  of  lower  social  groups  take  to domestic and  field work  quite early  in their lives. There are certainly  good economic  reasons for all these factors. As we  said economic  situation and  social situation  often reflect each others. We mentioned earlier that even the Gods that they  worship give  occasional clues.  While the  Hindu Gods proper,  Rama, Krishna, Siva etc. are worshipped by all Hindus generally  there are several local Gods and Goddesses in each  village worshipped  only by the inferior castes. In Andhra Pradesh,  for example,  in every village the socalled inferior castes worship the goddesses Sunkalamma,  Gangamma, Polimeramma (the  Goddess guarding  the  village  boundary), Yellamma (another Goddess guarding the vi11age limits). They celebrate Hindu  festivals like  Dasara, Deepawali  etc. but also other  festivals in  which the  upper  classes  do  not participate.      There are  many other  customs, rituals  or  habits  of significance which  if one only cares to study them mark out the socially back ward classes. The weight to be attached to these factors depends 433 upon the  circumstances  of  the  case  which  can  only  be revealed  by   thoughtful,  penetrating   investigation  and analysis. It  cannot be  done A  by  means  of  mathematical formulae but  only by  looking in the round or taking a look at the  entire situation.  Sometimes it  may be  possible to readily identify  certain castes or social groups as a whole as socially  forward or  socially backward classes. Poverty, of course,  is basic,  being the  root cause  as well as the rueful result  of social  and educational  backwardness. But mere  poverty   it  seems   is  not  enough  to  invite  the Constitutional branding, because of the vast majority of the people of our country are poverty-struck but some among them are socially  and educationally forward and others backward. In a  country like  India where 80% of the people live below the bread-line,  even the majority of the so called socially forward classes  may be  poor. For example no one will think of describing  Brahmins anywhere in the land as socially and

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 65 of 106  

educationally backward however, poor they might be. The idea that poor  Brahmins may also be eligible for the benefits of Articles 15(4)  and  16(4)  is  too  grotesque  even  to  be considered. Similarly  no one  can possibly  claim that  the patels of  Gujarat, the  Kayasthas of Bengal, the Reddys and Kammas of  Andhra Pradesh  are  socially  backward  classes, despite the  fact that  the majority  of them  may  be  poor farmers and  agricultural laborers.  In  the  rural,  social ladder they  are indeed  high up  and despite  the  economic backwardness of  sizeable sections  of them, they can not be branded as  socially backward.  On the other hand, there are several castes  or other  social groups  who have only to be named  to   be  immediately   identified  as   socially  and economically  backward   classes,  identified   as  socially backward  classes.  Again  illustrating  from  rural  Andhra Pradesh, one  can easily  identify caste  groups,  such  as, Kommaras (who traditionally carry on the occupation of black smiths), Kummaris (who traditionally carry on the occupation of  potters),  Vadderas  (who  traditionally  carry  on  the occupation of  Stone breaking),  Mangalis (who traditionally carry  on  the  occupation  of  Barbers)  and  Besthas  (who traditionally carry  on the occupation of Fisher folk), etc. as backward  classes by  the mere  mention of  their castes. True, a few members of those caste or social groups may have progressed far  enough and  forged ahead  so as  to  compare favourably with  the leading  forward classes  economically, socially and  educationally. In such cases, perhaps an upper income ceiling  would secure  the benefit  of reservation to such of  those members  of the  class who really deserve it. But one  is entitled  to ask what is to happen to the poorer sections of  the forward classes? The State will have to-and it is the duty of the State so to do-to 434 discover other  means of  assisting them,  means other  than reservations A  under Arts.  15(4) and  16(4). All this only emphasises that  in the  ultimate  analysis,  attainment  of economic equality  is the final and the only solution to the besetting problems.  There is  also one  danger in  adopting individual poverty  as the criterion to identify a member of the backward  classes, which needs to be pointed out. How is one n  to identify  the  individuals  who  are  economically backward and,  therefore, to  be classified  as socially and educationally  backward?   Are   all   those   who   produce certificates from  an official or a legislator or some other authority that  their family incomes are less than a certain figure to  be so  classified? It should be easy to visualise who will  obtain such  certificates? Of  course,  the  rural elite, the  upper classes  of the  rural areas who don’t pay any income tax because agricultural income is not taxed. Who will  find   it  difficult  or  impossible  to  obtain  such certificates? Of  course, the  truly lower  classes who need them most.      Class poverty, not individual poverty, is therefore the primary test. Other ancillary tests are the way of life, the standard of  living, the  place in the social hierarchy, the habits and customs, etc. etc. Despite individual exceptions, it  may   be  possible   and  easy   to  identify   socially backwardness with  reference to  caste,  with  reference  to residence,  with  reference  to  occupation  or  some  other dominant feature. Notwithstanding our antipathy to caste and sub-regionalism, these  are facts  of life  which cannot  be wished away.  If they  reflect poverty  which is the primary source of  social and educational backwardness, they must be recognised for  what they  are along with other less primary sources  There   is  and  there  can  be  nothing  wrong  in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 66 of 106  

recognising  poverty   wherever  it   is  reflected   as  an identifiable group  phenomena whether  you see it as a caste group, a  sub-regional group,  an occupational group or some other class.  Once the  relevant conditions  are taken  into consideration, how  and where to draw the line is a question for each State to consider since the economic and social  conditions  differ from  area. Once the relevant conditions are taken into consideration and the backwardness of a class of people  is determined,  it will  not be  for the court to interfere  in   the  matter.   But,  lest   there   be   any misunderstanding, judicial review will rot stand excluded .      SEN, J.  In view  of the  importance  of  the  question involved, would like to add a few words of my own. 435      The  real   question  raised   is  not   of   excessive reservation   for    the   advancement   of   socially   and educationally  backward  classes  of  citizens  or  for  the Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled  Tribes under  Art. 15(4) or for reservation  of appointments  or posts  in favour of any backward classes  of citizens under Art. 16(4) which, in the opinion of  the State,  is not adequately represented in the services under  the State  but the  question is  as  to  the identification of  the socially  and educationally  backward classes of citizens for whose advancement the State may make special provisions  under Art.  1’(4)  like  those  for  the Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled  Tribes.  Conceptually,  the making of special provisions for the advancement of backward classes of  citizens under  Art. 15(4)  and  the  system  of reservation of  appointments or  posts as  envisaged by Art. 16(4) as  guaranteed in  the  Constitution,  is  a  national commitment and a historical need to eradicate age-old social disparities in  our country. But unfortunately the policy of reservation hitherto  formulated by  the Government  for the upliftment  of  such  socially  and  educationally  backward classes of  citizens  is  caste-oriented  while  the  policy should be based on economic criteria. Then alone the element of caste  in making  such special provisions or reservations under Arts.  15(4) and 16(4) can be removed. At present only the privileged  groups within  the backward classes i.e. the forwards among the backward classes reap all the benefits of such reservation  with the result that the lowest of the low are  stricken   with  poverty  and  therefore  socially  and economically   backward   remain   deprived   though   these constitutional provisions  under Arts.  (15(4) and 16(4) are meant for their advancement.      After 37  years of attainment of independence it cannot be seriously  disputed that  poverty is  the root  cause  of social and  economic  backwardness.  The  problem  is  about identification of the backward classes for whose benefit the State may  make special  provisions under Art. 15(4). Or for reservation of  appointments or  posts under  Art. 16(4). In view of  the widespread public unrest in the State of Madhya Pradesh and  Gujarat in  recent days,  the Government at the Centre must  have a  second look  at  the  whole  system  of reservation. It  is true  that  mere  economic  backwardness would  not  satisfy  the  test  of  educational  and  social backwardness under  Art. IS(4) but the question is as to the criteria to be adopted. Economic backwardness is only one of the tests  to determine social and educational backwardness. If that  test were  to be  the sole  criterion of social and educational   backwardness,    the   reservation   for   the advancement of  such classes to special treatment under Art. 15(4) would fail. 436      In retrospect, the answer to the question as to who are

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 67 of 106  

the A members of socially and educationally backward classes for whose  advancement the State may make special provisions under Art.  15(4)  still  eludes  us.  Why  should  not  the expression ’backward  classes’ be treated as synonymous with the weaker  sections of  the society?  Does the word ’class’ denote a  caste or  sub-caste among  Hindus so far as Hindus are concerned,  or a  section or  a group  so far as Muslim, Christian or  other religious  communities and  denomination are concerned? In my considered opinion. the predominant and the only  factor for  making special  provisions under  Art. 15(4) or  for reservations  of posts  and appointments under Art. 16(4)  should be poverty, and caste or a sub-caste or a group should  be used only for purposes of identification of persons  comparable  to  Scheduled  Castes  -  or  Scheduled Tribes, till such members of backward classes attain a state of enlightment  and there  is eradication of poverty amongst them and they become equal partners in 8 new social order in our national life.      In this  context, I must point out that the adequacy or otherwise of  representation of  the backward classes in the services  has   to  be  determined  with  reference  to  the percentage of  that class  in the  population and  the total strength of  the service as a whole. The representation does not have  to exactly  correspond to  the percentage  of that class in  the population;  it just to be adequate. Moreover, in the  case of services the extent of representation has to be considered  by taking into account  the number of members of that  class in  the service,  whether  they  are  holding reserved or  unreserved posts.  I cannot  overemphasize  the need for  a rational examination of the 17 whole question of reservation in  the light of the observation made by us. The State should  give due  importance and  effect to  the  dual constitutional mandates of maintenance of efficiency and the equality of  opportunity for  all persons.  The  nature  and extent of  reservations must  be rational and reasonable. It may be,  and often  is difficult  for the  Court to draw the line in  advance which  the State ought not to cross, but it is never  difficult for  the Court  to know that an invasion across the border, however ill-defined, has taken place. The Courts have  neither  the  expertise  nor  the  sociological knowledge to define or lay down the criteria for determining what are  ’socially and  educationally backward  classes  of citizens’ within  the meaning of Art 15(4) which enables the State to  make ’special  provisions for  the advancement’ of such classes  notwithstanding the command of Art. 15(2) that the State shall not discriminate against and citizens on the 437 ground only  of religion,  race, caste,  descent,  place  of birth, residence  or any  of them. Art. 340 provides for the appointment of  a Commission  to ’investigate the conditions of socially  and educationally  backward classes  within the territory of  India and  the difficulties  under which  they labour and  to make  recommendations as  to the  steps  that should be  taken by  the Union  or any  State to remove such difficulties and  to improve  their condition.  The state of backwardness of  any class  of citizens  is a fact situation which  needs  investigation  and  determination  by  a  fact finding body  which has  the expertise and the machinery for collecting relevant  data. The Constitution has provided for the appointment of such a Commission for Backward Classes by the President  under Art.  340 to  make recommendations  and left it  to the  State to  make special  provisions for  the advancement of  such backward  classes. The  Court  is  ill- equipped to  perform the task of determining whether a class of citizens  is socially  and educationally  backward.  This

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 68 of 106  

Court has, however, a duty to interpret the Constitution and to see what it means and intends when it makes provision for the advancement  of socially  and educationally  back-  ward classes. In  considering this  situation then, we must never forget that it is the Constitution we are expounding. Except for this the Court has very little or no function.      Questions  as   to  the   validity  or   otherwise   of reservations have  been agitated  several times  before this Court and  resolved. The  frequency and  vigour  with  which these questions are raised is a disturbing indication of the tension and  unease in  society in  regard to  the manner in which Art.  15(4) and  Art. 16(4) are operated by the State. The Preamble  to our Constitution shows the nation’s resolve to secure  to all its citizens: Justice-Social, economic and political. The  State’s  objective  of  bringing  about  and maintaining  social  justice  must  be  achieved  reasonably having regard  to  the  interests  of  all.  Irrational  and unreasonable moves  by the State will slowly but surely tear apart the  fabric of  society. It  is primarily the duty and function  of   the  State  to  inject  moderation  into  the decisions taken under Arts. 15(4) and 16(4), because justice lives in  the hearts  of men  and growing sense of injustice and reverse  discrimination, fuelled by unwise State action, will destroy,  not advance,  social justice.  If  the  State contravenes the  constitutional mandates  of Art.  16(1) and Art. 335,  this Court  will of  course, have  to perform its duty.      The extent  of reservation  under Art.  15(4) and  Art. 16(4) must  necessarily vary  from State  to State  and from region to region within 438 a State,  depending upon  the  conditions  prevailing  in  a particular A  State or region, of the Backward Classes. r do feel  that   the  Central  Government  should  consider  the feasibility of  appointing a  permanent National  Commission for  Backward   Classes  which  must  constantly  carry  out sociological and economic study from State to State and from region  to  region  within  a  State.  The  framers  of  the Constitution by  enacting Art.  340  clearly  envisaged  the setting up  of such  a high-powered  National Commission for Backward classes  at the Centre. These problems can never be resolved through litigation in the Courts.      I  wish   to  add   that  the  doctrine  of  protective discrimination embodied  in Arts.  15(4) and  16(4) and  the mandate  of   Art.  29(2)   cannot  be  stretched  beyond  a particular limit.  The State  exists to  serve  its  people. There are some services where expertise and skill are of the essence. For example, a hospital run by the State serves the ailing members  of the  public who need medical aid. Medical services directly  affect and  deal with the health and life of the  populace. Professional  expertise, term of knowledge and experience,  of a high degree of technical knowledge and operational  skill   is  required  of  pilots  and  aviation engineers. The  lives of  citizens depend  on such  persons. There are  other similar  fields  of  governmental  activity where  professional,   technological,  scientific  or  other special skill is called for. In such services or posts under the Union  or States,  we think  there can  be no  room  for reservation of  posts; merit  alone must  be  the  sole  and decisive consideration for appointments.      Reasons for this decision will follow.      VENKATARAMIAH,  J.   The  constitutional   validity  of certain Government  orders issued  by the  Government of the State of Karnataka making provisions for reservation of some seats in  technical  institutions  and  some  posts  in  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 69 of 106  

Government services  respectively under  Article  15(4)  and Article 16(4)  of the Constitution of India for being filled up by  students, ‘candidates,  as the case may be, belonging to certain  castes, tribes  and  communities  which  in  the opinion of the State Government constituted backward classes (other than  the Scheduled  Castes and the Scheduled Tribes) is questioned in these petitions.      The questions  involved in  these cases  fare  delicate ones and  have, therefore, to be tackled with great caution. The issues raised here and the decision rendered on them are bound to have a great 439 impact on  society. They are indeed highly sensitive issues. A superficial  approach to the problem has, therefore, to be avoided. A  The questions  have to  be tackled with sympathy for persons  who are really in need of the benign assistance at the  hands of  the State  and  with  due  regard  to  the interests of the general public.      "India’s  vast   and   unparalleled   experiment   with ’protective’ or  ’compensatory’ discrimination  in favour of ’backward sections’  of her population betokens a generosity and  farsightedness   that  are   rare  among  nations.  The operation  of   such  a   preferential  principle   involves formidable burdens  of policy-making and administration in a developing nation.  It also  places upon the judiciary tasks of great  complexity and  delicacy. The  courts  must  guard against abuses  of the  preferential principle  while at the same time insuring that the government has sufficient leeway to devise  effective use  of  the  broad  powers  which  the Constitution places  at its  disposal". These  are the  wise words of  Marc Galanter,  a member  of the faculty on social Sciences, University  of Chicago,  who has  made  a  special study of  the problem  of the  Indian backward  classes. The very fact  that the governmental agencies and ’above all the courts have  been  obliged  to  examine  the  constitutional principles in  the light of the egalitarian pressures has in its turn  opened up  hardly foreseen  complexities that  had lain buried  in the doctrine of equality’. The society which cherishes the  ideal of  equality has  to define the meaning and content  of the concept of equality and the choices open to it  to bring about an egalitarian society would always be political. But  the courts  have been forced to scrutinise a variety of choices, while the society for which they have to answer has  been issuing a proliferation of demands. What is ’coming  about,   in   short,   is   a   transformation   of consciousness which  is tinged with sensations of in justice and exploitation’.  Many inequalities  in  the  past  seemed almost to  have been  part of  the  order  of  nature.  ’The categories of  equality can  thus in  a  sense  be  seen  to correspond  to   levels  of   awareness.  Perhaps   not  all inequalities can  ever be  rectified and  it is certain that some can  be rectified only by creating new inequalities and new grievances.  It is  this that has made the judiciary the fulcrum of  such continuous  tension for it is the judiciary and above  all the  Supreme Court  which  has  the  duty  of mediating these  conflicting demands back to society through the prism  of constitutional  interpretation’.  The  courts, however, deal  with  the  problems  that  society  presents. ’Levels of  awareness and  corresponding senses of grievance have arisen  at different  times for  particular  historical reasons often tend 440 ing to differentiate among the categories of equality rather than unifying  them. Inequalities  of class,  race, religion and sex  have presented  themselves at  different periods as

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 70 of 106  

primary grievances’. Equality of opportunity revolves around two  dominant   principles-(1)  the   traditional  value  of equality of  opportunity and  (2) the  newly appreciated-not newly conceived-idea of equality of results. ’Social justice may demand  and political  interests may  make  expedient  a policy of  correction in  favour of  individual  members  of minorities or  communities. But  at this  point whenever any action was  taken the  principle of  individual equality  of opportunity lost  its  direction.  Such  affirmative  action played off  not one  individual of one group against another of another  group, but the present against the past. In past many privileged  persons of  mediocre ability  had benefited from the  indulgence of  a system that unquestionably biased in favour  of higher  castes.’ ’Individual aspirations claim the protection  of society’s  rules. But they are not always in harmony  and sometimes  conflict with  the same society’s broad interest in achieving certain kinds of racial or group balance.’ But  rectification  of  imbalance  also  sometimes tends towards inequality. ’Societies do not work on absolute rationality, excess of rationality often tends to dehumanise human relations’.  The courts  are also  reminded  that  for those who  are suffering  from  deprivation  of  inalienable rights, gradualism  can never be a sufficient remedy because as Ralph  Buoche  observed  ’inalienable  rights  cannot  be enjoyed posthumously’.  Ours is  a ’struggle  for status,  a struggle to  take democracy off parchment and give it life’. ’Social injustice  always balances  its books with red ink’. Neither the  caprice of personal taste nor the protection of vested interests  can be  stand as  reasons for  restricting opportunities of  any appropriately  qualified person. These are the  considerations which  sometimes may  be conflicting that should weigh with the courts dealing with cases arising out of  the doctrine  of equality.  It should,  however,  be remembered that  the courts  by  themselves  are  not  in  a position to  bring the  concept of  equality  into  fruitful action. They  should be supported by the will of the people, of the Government and of the legislators. There should be an emergence of  united action  on the  part of all segments of human society.  This is  not all.  Mere will  to bring about equality under  the existing economic level might worsen the situation. There  should be at the same time a united action to increase  the national resources so that the operation of equality will be less burdensome 441 and every  member of  the society  is carried  to  a  higher social and  economic level  leaving nobody  below a  minimum which guarantees  all the  basic human needs to every member of  the   society.  If   there  is   no  united  action  the pronouncements by courts would become empty words as many of the high  principles  adumberated  in  the  chapter  on  the Directive Principles  of State  Policy in  the  Constitution have turned  out to  be owing  to several factors which need not be detailed here. We shall proceed to consider this case against this background.      In this  case, the  Court is called upon to resolve the conflict  between   ’the  meritarian   principle   and   the compensatory principle’  in the  matter of  admissions  into institutions imparting  higher education  and of  entry into Government service  in  the  State  of  Karnataka.  All  the contestants depend  upon one  or the  other clauses  of  the Constitution in  support of their case. Hence the problem is rendered more difficult.      Those who  argue in  support of  merit contend that the State should  remove all man-made obstacles which are in the way of  an Individual and allow him to attain his goal in an

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 71 of 106  

atmosphere of  free competition relying upon his own natural skill and  intelligence. Those  who argue  for  compensatory principle contend  that in order that the competition may be ’fair and not just free’ it is the duty of the State to take note of  the unequal  situation of the individuals concerned which has  led to  unequal capacities  amongst them  and  to reduce the  rigours of  free competition  which may,  unless looked into  by the  State,  lead  to  perpetual  denial  of equality of  opportunity  to  the  weak  and  the  neglected sections of  society. This  argument is  based on  the  well founded assumption  that unequal conditions of cultural life at home  cause  unequal  cultural  development  of  children belonging to  different strata  of  society.  The  need  for social action is necessitated by the environment factors and living  conditions   of  the   individuals  concerned.   The application  of   the   principle   of   individual   merit, unmitigated by other considerations, may quite often lead to inhuman results. The following illustration given by Bernard Williams establishes the above statement:           "Suppose that  in a certain society great prestige      is attached  to membership  of  a  warrior  class,  the      duties of  which require  great physical strength. This      class has  in the  past  been  recruited  from  certain      wealthy families 442      only ;  but egalitarian reforms achieve a change in the      rules,  by   which  warriors  are  recruited  from  all      sections of  the society,  on the results of a suitable      competition, The  effect of  this, however, is that the      wealthy  families   still  provide  virtually  all  the      warriors, because the rest of the populage is so under-      nourished by  reason of  poverty  that  their  physical      strength is  inferior to that of the weal thy and well-      no nourished.  The reformers  protest that  equality of      opportunity has  not really  been achieved; the wealthy      reply that  in fact  it has, and that the poor now have      the opportunity  of becoming  warriors- it  is just bad      luck that  their characteristics  are such that they do      not pass  the test.  ’We  are  not,’  they  might  say,      ’excluding anyone for being poor, we exclude people for      being weak,  and it  is unfortunate  that those who are      poor are also weak.’           This answer  would seem  to most people feeble and      even cynical  This is  for  reasons  similar  to  those      discused before  in connection with equality before the      law; that the supposed equality of opportunity is quite      empty indeed,  one may  say any that it does not really      exist- unless  it is made more effective than this. For      one knows  that it  could be  made more  effective: one      knows that  there is  a casual connection between being      poor and  being  under  nourished,  and  between  being      undernourished and  being physically  weak. One suppose      further  that   something  could   be  done-subject  to      whatever economic  conditions   obtain in  the imagined      society to  alter the distribution  of wealth. All this      being so,  the appeal  by the wealthy to the ’bad luck’      of the poor must appear as disingenuous."      The former  princely State  of Mysore  which now  forms part of the State of Karnataka is one of the earliest States in the  country in  which  the  system  of  reservation  for backward classes  in public  ser vices  was  introduced.  In 1918, the  Government of His Highness the Maharaja of Mysore appointed a  committee under  the chairmanship of Sir Leslie C. Miller,  Chief Justice  of the  Chief Court  of Mysore to investigate and  report on  the problem of backward classes.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 72 of 106  

The questions  referred to  that Committee  were (i) changes needed in  the then  existing rules of recruitment to public services; (ii) special 443 facilities to  encourage higher  and professional  education among the  members of  backward classes  and (iii) any other special measures  which  might  be  taken  to  increase  the representation  of   backward  communities   in  the  public services without  materially affecting  the efficiency,  due regard being  paid also  to the general good accruing to the State by  a wider  diffusion of  education  and  feeling  of increased status  which will  thereby  be  produced  in  the backward communities.  It is significant that the expression ’backward classes’  and  ’backward  communities’  were  used almost  interchangeably  and  that  the  idea  contained  in Article 335  of the  Constitution that  any reservation made should not impair efficiency was anticipated more than three decades before  the Constitution  was enacted. The Committee submitted its report in 1921 containing its opinion that all communities in  the State  other  than  Brahmins  should  be understood as  backward communities  regarding whom  it made certain recommendations. The Government orders issued on the basis of that Report continued to be in force till 1956 i.e. the reorganisation  of States  which brought  together  five integrating units-the  former State  of  Maysore  (including Bellary District),  Coorg, four districts of Bombay, certain portions of the State of Hyderabad and the district of South Kanara and  the Kollegal Taluk which formerly formed part of the State  of Madras. There were different lists of backward communities in  the five  integrating units  and  they  were allowed  to   continue   for   sometime   even   after   the reorganisation of States- In order to bring about uniformity the State  Government issued  a notification  containing the list of backward classes for the purpose of Article 15(4) of the Constitution  at the  beginning of 1959. The validity of that  notification   and  of   another  notification  issued thereafter on  the same  topic which  according to the State Government had  treated all  persons except Brahmins. Banias and Kayasthas  as backward communities was challenged before the High  Court of  Mysore in Rama Krishna Singh v. State of Maysore.(l) The  two notifications  were struck  down by the HighCourt. The High Court held that inasmuch as the impugned notifications contained a list of backward classes including 95% of the population of the State and all Hindu communities other than Brahmins, Banias and Kayasthas and all other non- Hindu communities  in the  State  except  Anglo-Indians  and Parsees had  been treated  as backward  classes it  resulted more  in   a  discrimination   against  the   few   excluded communities consisting  of about  5% of the total population rather than making provision for socially and      (1) A.I.R.. 1960 Mys. 338. 444 educationally backward  classes. The  High Court  held  that making A  provision  for  communities  which  were  slightly backward to the so called forward communities did not amount to making  provision for the communities which really needed protection under  Article 15(4)  of  the  Constitution.  The argument of  the petitioners  in that case that socially and educationally backward  classes can in no case be determined on the  basis of  caste was,  however, rejected.  After  the above decision  was rendered  by the  High Court,  the State Government constituted  a Committee OD January 8, 1960 under the Chairmanship  of Dr.  R. Nagan  Gowda for the purpose of determining the  criteria for the classification of backward classes in  the State with the following terms of reference:

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 73 of 106  

( I)  to suggest  the criteria  to be adopted in determining which sections  of the people in the State should be treated as socially  and educationally  backward and  (2) to suggest the exact manner in which the criteria thus indicated should be followed  to enable the State Government to determine the persons  who   should  secure  such  preference  as  may  be determined  by   Government  in  respect  of  admissions  to technical  institutions   and  appointment   to   Government services. The said committee submitted its Interim Report on February 19, 1960. On the basis of the Interim Report of the Committee, the  State Government  passed an order dated June 9, 1960  regarding admissions  to professional and technical institutions reserving  22% of  seats for  backward classes, 15% for Scheduled Castes and 2% for Scheduled Tribes and the remaining 60%  of seats  were allowed  to be filled upon the basis of  merit. The  above Government order was, challenged before the High Court of Mysore in S.A. Partha & Ors. v. The State of  Mysore &  Ors.(l) The  High Court  found that  the direction contained  in the  Government  order to the effect that if  any seat or seats reserved for candidates belonging to  the  Scheduled  Castes  and  Scheduled  Tribes  remained unfilled, the  same shall  be filled  by candidates of other backward classes  was unconstitutional.  It also  gave  some directions regarding  the manner in which the calculation of the quota  of reservation  should be  made.  Thereafter  the Final Report  was submitted  by the Nagan Gowda Committee on May  16,   1961  After   taking   into   consideration   the recommendations  made   in  the   said  Report,   the  State Government issued an order for the purpose of Article 15 (4) of the  Constitution on  July 10,  1961. By  that order, the State Government  specified 81 classes of people as backward classes and  13 S classes of people as more backward classes and reserved 30% of      (1) A.I.R.. 1961 Mys. 220. 445 seats in  the professional  and technical  institutions  for backward and  more backward classes. 15% and 3% of the seats were reserved  for Scheduled  Castes  and  Scheduled  Tribes respectively and the remaining 52% of the seats were allowed to be  filled up on merit. The above order was superseded by a fresh  Government order  made on  July 31,  1962  for  the purpose of  Article 15  (4). By  this new  order, 28% of the seats were  reserved for  the backward  classes, 22% for the more backward  classes, 15 per cent for the Scheduled Castes and 3 per cent for the Scheduled Tribes. Thus 68 per cent of the  seats  were  reserved  under  Article  15  (4)  of  the Constitution and  only 32  per  cent  of  the  seats  became available for  being filled  up on  the basis of merit. This order was  challenged before  this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution  in  M.R.  Balaji  and  Ors.  v.  State  of Mysore.(1) In  the decision  rendered in  that case which is considered   to   be   land-mark   in   the   constitutional pronouncement made  by this Court, Gajendragadkar, J. (as he then was)  explained the  meaning of  the term ’socially and educationally backward  classes’ appearing in Article 15 (4) of the Constitution at pages 459-461 thus:           "The backwardness under Art. 15 (4) must be social      and educational. It is not either social or educational      but it  is both  social and educational; and that takes      us to  the question  as to  how social  and educational      backwardness has to be determined.           Let us  take the  question of  social backwardness      first. By  what test  should it  be decided  whether  a      particular class  is socially  backward or  not  ?  The      group of  citizens to  whom Article  15 (4) applies are

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 74 of 106  

    described as  ’classes of  citizens’, not  as castes of      citizens. A class, according to the dictionary meaning,      shows division  of society according to status, rank or      caste.  In   the   Hindu   social   structure,   caste,      unfortunately plays  an important  part in  determining      the  status   of  the   citizen.  Though  according  to      sociologists and  Vedic scholars,  the caste system may      have originally  begun on  occupational  or  functional      basis,  in   course  of   time,  it  became  rigid  and      inflexible. The  history of  the growth of caste system      shows that  its original  functional  and  occupational      basis was  later over-  burdened with considerations of      purity based on ritual      (1) [1963] Supp. S.C.R. 439, 446      concepts  and  that  led  to  its  ramifications  which      introduced inflexibility  and rigidity. This artificial      growth  inevitably   tended  to  create  a  feeling  of      superiority and  inferiority and to foster narrow caste      loyalties. Therefore,  in dealing  with the question as      to whether  any class  of citizens is socially backward      or not,  it may  not be  13 irrelevant  to consider the      caste  of   the  said   group  of   citizens.  In  this      connection, it  is, however,  necessary to bear in mind      that the  special provision is contemplated for classes      of citizens  and not  for individual  citizens as such,      and so,  though the  caste of the group of citizens may      be relevant,  its importance should not be exaggerated.      If the  classification of  backward classes of citizens      was based  solely on  the caste  of the citizen, it may      not always  be logical and may perhaps contain the vice      of perpetuating the castes themselves.           Besides, if the caste of the group of citizens was      made  the   sole  basis   for  determining  the  social      backwardness  of   the  said  group,  that  test  would      inevitably break  down in  relation to many sections of      Indian Society  which do  not recognise  castes in  the      conventional sense  known to  Hindu Society. How is one      going to  decide whether  Muslims, Christians or Jains,      or even  Lingayats are  socially, backward or not ? The      test of  castes would  be inapplicable to those groups,      but that  would hardly  justify the  exclusion of these      groups in  to  from the operation of Art. 15 (4). It is      not unlikely  that  in  some  States  some  Muslims  or      Christians or  Jains forming  groups  may  be  socially      backward. That  is why  we think  that though castes in      relation to Hindus may be a relevant factor to consider      in determining  the social  backwardness of  groups  or      classes of  citizens, it cannot be made the sole or the      dominant test in that behalf. Social backwardness is on      the ultimate  analysis the result of poverty, to a very      large  extent.   The  classes   of  citizens   who  are      deplorably poor automatically became socially backward.      They do  not  enjoy  a  status  in  society  and  have,      therefore, to be content to take a backward seat. It is      true  that   social  backwardness  which  results  from      poverty is likely lo be aggravated by considerations of      caste to which the poor citizens may belong, but that 447      only shows  the relevance  of both caste and poverty in      determining the backwardness of citizens. A           The occupations of citizens may also contribute to      make classes  of citizens  Socially backward. There are      some  occupations   which  are   treated  as   inferior      according  to   conventional  beliefs  and  classes  of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 75 of 106  

    citizens who  follow   these  occupations  are  apt  to      become socially  backward. The place of habitation also      plays not  a minor part in determining the backwardness      of a  community of  persons. In a sense, the problem of      social backwardness  is the  problem of Rural India and      in  that   behalf,  classes  of  citizens  occupying  a      socially backward  position in  rural area-fall  within      the purview  of Art.  15 (4) The problem of determining      who are  socially backward  classes is undoubtedly very      compleat    Sociological,     social    and    economic      considerations come  into play  in solving  the problem      and evolving  proper  criteria  for  determining  which      classes are  socially  backward  is  obviously  a  very      difficult task; it will need an elaborate investigation      and collection of data and examining the said data in a      rational and  scientific way.  That is  the function of      the State  which purports  to act under Art 15 (4). All      that this  Court is  called upon to do in dealing which      the present  petitions is  to decide  whether the tests      applied by  the impugned  order are valid under Art. 15      (4). If  it appears  that the test applied by the order      in that  behalf  is  improper  and  invalid,  then  the      classification of  socially back  ward classes based on      that test  will have to be held to be inconsistent with      the requirements of Art. 15 (4)."      Dealing with  the  question  of  determination  of  the classes which  were educationally  backward, Gajendragadkar, J. (as  he then was) observed in the same case at pages 463- 464 thus:           "It  may  be  conceded  that  in  determining  the      educational backwardness  of a  class of  citizens  the      literacy test supplied by the Census Reports may not be      adequate; but it is doubtful if the test of the average      of student  population in  the last  three High  School      classes is  appropriate in  determining the educational      backwardness. Having  regard to  the fact that the test      is intended to determine who are educationally backward      classes, it may 448      not be  necessary or  proper to put the test as high as      has been  done by the Committee. But even assuming that      the test applied is rational and permissible under Art.      15 (4),  the question  still remains  as to  whether it      would be  legitimate to  treat  castes  or  communities      which are just below the State average as educationally      backward classes.  If the  State  average  is  6.9  per      thousand, a  community which satisfies the said test or      is just  below the  said test  cannot  be  regarded  as      backward. It  is only  communities which are well below      the State  average that  can properly  be  regarded  as      educationally backward  classes of citizens. Classes of      citizens whose  average  of  student  population  works      below 50  per cent  of the  State average are obviously      educationally backward  classes of citizens. Therefore,      in  our   opinion,  the  State  was  not  justified  in      including in  the list  of Backward  Classes, castes or      communities whose  average of  student  population  per      thousand was slightly above or very near, or just below      the State average." (underlining by us)      Applying  the  above  rule  the  Court  held  that  the inclusion of  members of  the Lingayat community in the list of backward classes was erroneous. On the question of extent of reservation  that can be made, this Court observed in the aforesaid case at pages 469-471 thus:           "The learned  Advocate-General has  suggested that

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 76 of 106  

    reservation of  a large  number of seats for the weaker      sections of  the society  would not  affect either  the      depth or  efficiency of  scholarship  at  all,  and  in      support  of   this  argument,  he  has  relied  on  the      observations made  by the  Backward Classes  Commission      that it  found no  complaint in  the States  of Madras,      Andhra, Travancore-Cochin  and Mysore  where the system      of recruiting candidates from other Backward Classes to      the  reserve  quota  has  been  in  vogue  for  several      decades.  The   Committee  further  observed  that  the      representatives of  the upper  classes did not complain      about any  lack of  efficiency in the offices recruited      by reservation  (p. 135).  This  opinion,  however,  is      plainly inconsistent  with what  is  bound  to  be  the      inevitable  consequence   of  reservation   in   higher      university education.  If admission to professional and      technical colleges  is unduly  liberalist it  would  be      idle to contend 449      that the quality of our graduates will not suffer. That      is not to say that reservation should not be adopted; A      reservation should  and must  be adopted to advance the      prospects of  the weaker  sections of  society, but  in      providing for  special measures  in  that  behalf  care      should be  taken not  to exclude  admission  to  higher      educational  centres   to   deserving   and   qualified      candidates of  other communities.  A special  provision      contemplated by  Art. 15  (4) like reservation of posts      and appointments  contemplated by  Art. 16  (4) must be      within  reasonable  limits.  The  interests  of  weaker      sections of  society which  are a  first charge  on the      States and  the Center  have to  be adjusted  with  the      interests of  the community  as a whole. The adjustment      of these  competing claims  is undoubtedly  a difficult      matter, but  if under  the guise  of making  a  special      provision, a  State reserves  practically all tho seats      available in  all the  colleges, that  clearly would be      subverting the  object of  Art. 15  (4). In this matter      again, we are reluctant to say definitely what would be      a proper provision to make. Speaking generally and in a      broad way,  a special  provision should be less than 50      per cent;  how much  less than 50 per cent would depend      upon the  relevant  prevailing  circumstances  in  each      case. In  this particular  case, it  is remarkable that      when the  State issued  its order  on July 10, 1961, it      emphatically expressed its opinion that the reservation      of 68  per cent  recommended  by  the  ‘Nagging  Gowada      Committee would  not be  in the larger interests of the      State. What happened between July 10, 1961 and July 31,      1962, does  not appear  on the  record. But  the  State      changed its  mind and adopted the recommendation of the      Committee ignoring  its earlier  decision that the said      recommendation was  contrary to the larger interests of      the State.  In our  opinion, when  the  State  makes  a      special provision  for the  advancement of  the  weaker      sections of society specified in Art. 15 (4), it has to      approach its task objectively and in a rational manner.      Undoubtedly,  it   has  to  take  reasonable  and  even      generous  steps  to  help  the  advancement  of  weaker      elements; the  extent of  the problem  must be weighed,      the requirements  of the  community at  large  must  be      borne in mind and a formula must be evolved which would      strike  a   reasonable  balance   between  the  several      relevant considerations. Therefore, 450

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 77 of 106  

    we are  satisfied that  the reservation  of 68 per cent      directed by  the impugned order is plainly inconsistent      with Art. 15 (4)." (Emphasis added)      The petition was thus allowed by this Court.      Then came  the Government  order dated  July  26,  1963 which directed that 30 per cent of the seats in professional and technical  colleges and  institutions should be reserved for backward  classes as  defined in  that order and that 18 per cent  of the  seats should be reserved for the Scheduled Castes and  Scheduled Tribes. The criteria laid down in that order for  determining social and economic backwardness were two-fold-income and  occupation. It  stated that  those  who followed  occupations   of  agriculture,   petty   business, inferior service,  crafts  or  other  occupations  involving manual labour  and whose  family income  was less  than  Rs. 1,2001- per  annum  were  to  be  treated  as  belonging  to backward classes.  This order was questioned before the High Court in G. Viswanath v. Govt. of Mysore and Ors.(l) by some petitioners on  various grounds.  While dismissing  the said petitions, the High Court observed that the determination of the backward  classes without  reference to caste altogether was not  correct and  it expressed  the hope  that the State would  make  a  more  appropriate  classification  lest  its bonafides should  be questioned. In the appeal filed against this judgment  in R. Chitralekha and Anr. v. State of Mysore and Ors.,(2)  the correctness  of the  above observation was questioned. Dealing  with that question Subba Rao, J. (as he then was),  who  spoke  for  the  majority,  said  that  the observations of  the  High  Court  referred  to  above  were inconsistent with  the decision  in Balaji’s  case  (supra). After referring  to the  relevant observations  made by this Court in  Balaji’ case  (supra), Subba  Rao, J.  (as he then was) observed at pages 386-387 thus:           "Two principles  stand out  prominently  from  the      said observations,  namely, (i) the caste of a group of      citizens may be a relevant circumstance in ascertaining      their social  backwardness; and  (ii) though  it  is  a      relevant factor to determine the social backwardness of      a class  of citizens, it cannot be the sole or dominant      test in that behalf.      (1) A.I.R. 1964 Mys. 132.      (2) [1964] 6 S.C.R. 368 451      The observations  extracted in the judgment of the High      Court appear to be in conflict with the observations Of      A this  Court. While this Court said that caste is only      a relevant  circumstance and  that  it  cannot  be  the      dominant test  in ascertaining  the backwardness  of  a      class of  citizens, the  High Court  said that it is an      important basis  in determining  the class  of backward      Hindus and  that the  Government  should  have  adopted      caste as one of the tests As the said observations made      by the  High Court  may lead  to some  confusion in the      mind of  the authority  concerned who  may be entrusted      with the duty of prescribing the rules for ascertaining      the backwardness  of classes  of  citizens  within  the      meaning of  Art. 15 (4) of  the Constitution, we would      hasten to  make it  clear that caste is only a relevant      circumstance in  ascertaining  the  backwardness  of  a      class and  there is  nothing in  the judgment  of  this      Court which  precludes  the  authority  concerned  from      determining the  social  backwardness  of  a  group  of      citizens if  it can  do so  without reference to caste.      While  this   Court  has   not  excluded   caste   from      ascertaining the  backwardness of  a class of citizens,

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 78 of 106  

    it has  not made it one of the compelling circumstances      according  a   basis  for   the      ascertainment   of      backwardness of  a class.  To put  it differently,  the      authority concerned  may take  caste into consideration      in ascertaining the backwardness of a group of persons;      but, if  it does not, its order will not be bad on that      account, if  it can  ascertain the  backwardness  of  a      group  of  persons  on  the  basis  of  other  relevant      criteria." (Underlining by us)      Proceeding further,  Subba Rao,  J. (as  he  then  was) observed at pages 388-389 thus:           "The important  factor to  be noticed in Art. 5(4)      is that it does not speak of castes, but only speaks Or      classes. If  the makers of the Constitution intended to      take castes  also as  units of  social and  educational      backwardness, they would have said so as they have said      in the  case of  the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled      Tribes. Though  it may  be  suggested  that  the  wider      expression "classes"  is used  in cl. (4) of Art. 15 as      there are communities without castes, if take intention      was to equate classes with castes, 452      nothing prevented  the marks of the Constitution from A      using the  empression "backwarded  classes or  castes".      The juxtaposition  of the expression "backward classes"      and "Scheduled  Castes" in  Art.  15(4)  leads    to  a      reasonable inference  that the  empression "classes" is      not  synonymous   with  castes.  It  may  be  that  for      ascertaining whether a particular citizen or a group of      citizens belong  to a  backward class  or not,  his  or      their caste  may have some relevance, but it can not be      either  the   sole  or   the  dominant   criterion  for      ascertaining the class to which he or they belong.           This interpretation  will carry  out the intention      of  the   Constitution  expressed   in  the   aforesaid      Articles. It  helps the really backward classes instead      or promoting  the interests  of individuals  or  groups      who,  though  they  belong  to  a  particular  caste  a      majority  whereof   is   socially   and   educationally      backward, really  belong to  a class  which is socially      and educationally advanced. To illustrate, take a caste      in a State which is numerically the largest therein. It      may be  that though  a majority  of the  people in that      caste  are  socially  and  educationally  backward,  an      effective minority  may be  socially and  educationally      far more  advanced  than  another  small-sub-caste  the      total number  of  which  is  far  less  then  the  said      minority. If  we interpret  the empression "classes" as      "castes"  the   object  of  the  Constitution  will  be      frustrated and  the  people  who  do  not  deserve  any      adventitious aid  may get  it to the exclusion of those      who really  deserve. This  anomally will  not arise if,      without equating  caste with  class, caste  is taken as      only one  of the  considerations to ascertain whether a      person belongs to a backward class or not. On the other      hand,  if  the  entire  sub-caste,  by  and  large,  is      backward, it may be included in the Scheduled Castes by      following the  appropriate procedure  laid down  by the      Constitution".      In 1972,  tho State  Government appointed the Karnataka Backward Classes  Commission under  the chairmanship of Shri L. G. Havanur which after an elaborate enquiry submitted its Report on  November 19,  1975 in  four massive  volumes, the first volume  containing two  parts. rt  is stated  that the commission counted  a socio-economic  survey of 378 villages

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 79 of 106  

and town/city  blocks in  their entirety  covering more than 3,55,000 individuals belonging to 453 171 castes  and communities  with the  help of more than 425 investigators and  supervisors.  About  365  witnesses  were examined by  A the  Commission. The Report of the Commission is full  of tabular  statements and  it refer to a number of writings by  sociologists, demographers, jurists and persons will versed  in social  sciences. The work of the Commission deserves to  be commended as such an extensive investigation into  the  conditions  of  backward  classes  had  not  been conducted in  the State so far Perhaps till than in no other part of  India, such  on elaborate  investigation  had  been carried out  with reference  to so  many minute details. The commission recommended  that persons  belonging to  backward classes for  purpose of  Article 15(4)  of the  Constitution should be divided into three groups-(a) backward communities consisting of  15 castes,  (b) backward castes consisting of 128 castes  and (c) backward tribes consisting of 62 tribes. For purposes  Or Article  16(4)  of  the  Constitution,  the Commission divided  the backward  classes into  (a) backward communities consisting  of 9  castes.  (b)  backward  castes consisting of  115 castes and (c) backward tribes consisting of  61   tribes.  According   to  the  Commission,  backward communities were  those  castes  whose  student  average  of students passing  S.  S.  L.  C.  examination  in  1972  per thousand of  population was  below the  State average (which was 1.69  per thousand)  but above  50 per cent of the State average and  backward castes  and backward tribes were those castes and  tribes whose  student average  was below  50 per sent of  the State average except in the case of Dombars and Voddars and  those who  were Nomadic and de-notified tribes. The total  population of  these backward classes (other then Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled  Tribes,  according  to  the Commission, was about 45 per cent of the total population of the State.  The difference  between the  two lists-one under Article 15(4)  and the  other under  Article  16(4)  of  the Constitution  was   due  to   the   exclusion   of   certain communities, castes  and  tribes  which  were  socially  and educationally backward but which had adequate representation in the  services from  the list  prepared for the purpose of Article 16(4).  The Commission  recommended both for purpose of Article  15(4) and Article 16 4) the following percentage of reservations:           (i) Backward communities      16 percent           (ii) Backward castes          10 percent           (iii) Backward tribes         6 percent                                        ------------                Total:                   32 percent 454      The above  reservation of 32 per cent along with 18 per cent reserved  for Scheduled  Castes  and  Scheduled  Tribes together amounted  to 50  per cent  of the  total  seats  or posts,  as   the  case   may  be.   The  Commission  further recommended that  if seats/posts  remained unfilled  in  the quota allotted  to backward tribes, they should be made over to backward  communities and  backward castes.  Similarly if seats/posts  remain   unfilled  in  the  quota  allotted  to backward castes,  they  should  be  made  over  to  backward communities and  backward tribes.  If, however,  seats/posts remain unfilled  in the quota allotted to any of those three categories, they should be made over to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.  In the  event  of  seats/posts  remaining unfilled  by   any  of  these  categories,  they  should  be transferred to the general pool.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 80 of 106  

    After considering  the Report  of the  Backward Classes Commission, the  State  Government  issued  an  order  dated February 22,  1977  the  material  part  of  which  read  as follows:      "1   After  careful   consideration  of   the   various      recommendations made  by the Commission, Government are      pleased to direct as follows:           I. The  Backward Communities,  Backward Castes and      Backward Tribes  as mentioned  in the  list appended to      this Order  shall be  treated as  Backward Classes  for      purposes of  Article 15(4)  and Article  16(4)  of  the      Constitution of  India. Only  such  citizens  of  these      Backward Classes whose family income per annum from all      sources is Rs. 8,000 , (Rupees eight thousand only) and      below shall  be entitled  to  special  treatment  under      these Articles.           II. The  following  five  categories  of  citizens      shall  be  considered  as  a  special  group  and  such      citizens of  this Special  Group whose family income is      Rs. 4,800 (Rupees Four Thousand eight Hundred only) and      below per annum shall be eligible for special treatment      under these Articles:           (i)  an actual cultivator;           (ii) an artisan;           (iii)     a petty businessman; 455           (iv) one  holding   an   appointment   either   in                Government service  or corresponding services                under A  private employment  including casual                labour; and           (v)  any person  self employed  or engaged  in any                occupation involving manual labour.      Note :-  Family income  under sub-paras  I and II above      means income  of the  citizen and  his parents  and  if      either of the Parents is dead, his legal guardian.           III.  To  fix  the  reservation  for  purposes  of      Articles ]  5(4)  and  16(4)  of  the  Constitution  in      respect of  the Backward  Classes and the Special Group      of citizens  at 40  per cent,  the allocation  being as      follows:           (a) Backward Communities 20 (twenty per cent)           (b) Backward Castes 10 (ten per cent)           (c) Backward Tribes 5(five per cent)           (d) Special Group   5(five per cent) E      In the  list of  Backward communities  mentioned in the Government order,  the State  Government included  ’Muslims’ thus making  a total  of 16 backward communities In the list of backward castes, there were 129 castes including converts into Christianity  from Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes up to  second   generation  and   62  Schedules   Tribes.   The reservation for  backward classes  was 40 per cent and taken along with  18 per  cent for  Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, the  total reservation of seats/posts came to 58 per cent leaving  only 42  per cent  for merit pool. By an order dated May  1, 1979, the reservation for backward communities was reduced to 18 per cent for purposes of Article 16(4). By an order  dated June 27, 1979, the State Government modified the Government  order dated  February 22, 1977 by increasing the reservation  for ’Special  Group’ from  5 per cent to 15 per cent  both for  purposes of  Article 15(4)  and  Article 16(4) of  the Constitution.  Thus  as  on  date,  the  total reservation for purposes of Article 15(4) in 68 per cent and tor purposes of Article 16(4) is 66 per cent. There are only 32 per 456

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 81 of 106  

cent seats in professional and technical colleges and 34 per cent posts  in Government services which can be filled up on the basis of merits.      In these  writ petitions  filed under Article 32 of the Constitution the  above Government orders dated February 22, 1977 as  modified by the Government orders dated May 1, 1979 and June 27, 1979 are challenged.      It should  be stated  here that  the Government  orders dated February 22, 1977 and another notification dated March 4, 1977  issued for  purposes of Article 16(4) had also been challenged in a number of writ petitions filed under Article 226 of  the Constitution  before the High Court of Karnataka in S.C.  Somashekarappa &  Ors.  v.  State  of  Karnataka  & Ors.(l) The  High Court  allowed the writ petitions in part. It quashed the inclusion of ’Arasu’ community in the list of ’Backward Communities’  both for  purposes of  Article 15(4) and Article  16(4). It  also quashed  inclusion of  the  (i) Balaji,(ii) Devadiga, (iii) Gangia, (iv) Nayiada, (v) Rajput and (vi)  Satani in the list of backward communities and the inclusion of  (1) Banha, (2) Gurkha, (3) Jat, (4) Konga, (5) Kotari,  (6)   Koyava,  (7)   Malayali,  (&)  Maniyanani  or (Muniyani), (9)  Padarti, (  10) Padiyar, (11) Pandavakulam, (12) Raval and (13) Rawat in the list of Backward Castes for purposes of  Article 16(4)  of the Constitution. Reservation of 20  per cent  made for  Backward Communities in the State Civil Services  under Article  16(4) was  quashed  reserving liberty to  the State  Government to determine the extent of reservation in  accordance with  law. The classification and reservation in other respects was upheld. S.L.P. (Civil) No. 6656 of  1979 is filed against the said judgment of the High Court under  Article ]  36  of  the  Constitution.  The  two Government orders  dated May  1,  1979  and  June  27,  1979 referred to  above modifying  the earlier  Government orders were passed  after  the  judgment  of  the  High  Court  was pronounced, as stated above.      Volumes  have   been  written   on  the   caste  system prevailing in  India. The  caste (varna)  has its  origin in antiquity. We  find reference to it in the vedic lore and in the great  epics, in the Smritis and in the Puranas. Purusha Sukta refers  to the  prevalence of  the four Varnas (caste) (See Rig Veda X-90-12). The Lord says in the      (1) Writ  Petition No.  4371 of 1977 and connected writ petitions disposed of on April 9, 1979. 457 Bhagavadgita (lV- 13) that the fourfold caste was created by him by  the varying  distribution of  guna and  karma. Varna Dharma is  extold in many ancient treaties. However laudable the  division  of  society  into  different  castes  at  the commencement might  have been,  during the several centuries that followed  these castes became petrified making mobility from one  caste to another almost impossible. The caste of a person was known by his birth. There arose in course of time a social  hierarchy built  upon the caste system. The stigma of low  caste was attached to a person during his whole life with all the attendant disadvantages. Karua, the tragic hero of the  Mahabharata though  born of a Kshatriya princess had to suffer ignominy during his entire life time as he came to be known  as the  son of  a charioteer (Suta) belonging to a low caste.  He was  made to  say ’I may be a charioteer or a charioteer’s son.  I may  be anybody.  What does it matter ? Being born  in a  (high) caste  is  God’s  will  but  valour belongs to me.’ (See Veni Samhara by Bhatta Narayana).      There were  many sub-castes of different degrees in the hierarchy. Some were even treated as untouchables. People of low castes  became socially  backward and they in their turn

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 82 of 106  

neglected   studies.   Thus   they   became   socially   and educationally backward.  This part  of the Indian history is dismal indeed. A page of history is worth a volume of logic.      We are  aware of the meanings of the words caste, race, or tribe  or religious  minorities in  India. A  caste is an association  of   families  which  practice  the  custom  of endogamy i.e  which permits  marriages amongst  the  member. belonging to  such families  only. Caste  rules prohibit its members  from   marrying  outside  their  caste.  There  are subgroups amongst the castes which sometimes inter marry and sometimes do  not. A  caste is  based  on  various  factors, sometimes it  may be  a class,  a race  or a  racial unit. A caste has  nothing to  do with wealth. The caste of a person is governed  by his  birth in  a family.  Certain  ideas  of ceremonial purity  are peculiar  to  each  caste.  Sometimes caste practices  even led  to segregation  of same castes in the villages-  Even the  choice of  occupation of members of castes was predetermined in many cases, and the members of a particular caste were prohibited from engaging themselves in other types  of callings, professions or occupations Certain occupations were  considered to  be degrading  or impure.  A certain amount  of rigidity developed in several matters and many who 458 belonged to  castes which  were lower  in social  order were made  to   A  suffer   many  restrictions,   privations  and humiliations. Untouchability  was practised  against members belonging to  certain castes. Inter dining was prohibited in some cases.  None of  these  rules  governing  a  caste  had anything to  do with either the individual merit of a person or his  capacity. The wealth owned by him would not save him from  many   social  discriminations  practised  by  members belonging to higher castes. Children who grew in this caste- ridden  atmosphere   naturally  suffered  from  many  social disadvantages apart  from the  denial of opportunity to live in the  same kind  of environment in which persons of higher castes lived.  Many social  reformers have tried in the last two centuries  to remove  the stigma  of  caste  from  which people born  in lower  castes were suffering. Many laws were also passed prohibiting some of the inhuman caste practices. Article 15  (2) of the Constitution provides that no citizen shall on  grounds only  of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth  or any  of them  be  subject  to  any  disability, liability, restriction,  or condition  with  regard  to  (a) access to  shops, public  restaurants, hotels  and places of public entertainment  or (b)  use of  wells, tanks,  bathing ghats, roads  and places  of public resort maintained wholly or partly  out of State funds or dedicated to the use of the general public. Article 16 (2) declared that no person shall be ineligible to hold any civil post on grounds of religion, race,   caste    or   descent.    Article    17    abolished ’untouchability’ and  its practice  in  any  form.  Yet  the disadvantages from which many of the persons who belonged to various lower  castes were  suffering are  still  persisting notwithstanding the  fact that  some of them have progressed economically. socially  and educationally. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru writes  on the  social problems  created by  tho caste system which is peculiar to India in those terms:           "The conception and practice of caste embodied the      aristocratic  ideal   and  was   obviously  opposed  to      democratic conceptions.  It had  its  strong  sense  of      noblesse  oblige,   provided  people   kept  to   their      hereditary  stations   and  did   not   challenge   the      established order.  India’s  success  and  achievements      were on  the whole confined to the upper classes; those

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 83 of 106  

    lower down  in the scale had very few chances and their      opportunities  were   strictly  limited.   These  upper      classes were  not small  limited groups  but  large  in      numbers and  there was  a difusion  of power, authority      and influence. Hence they carried on successfully 459      for a  very long  period. But the ultimate weakness and      failing of  the caste  system  and  the  Indian  social      structure were  that they  degraded  a  mass  of  human      beings and  gave them  no opportunities  lo get  out of      that   condition-    educationally,   culturally,    or      economically. That  degradation brought  deterioration,      all along  the line  including in  its scope  even  the      upper classes. It led to the petrification which became      a dominant  feature of  India’s economy  and life.  The      contrasts  between  this  social  structure  and  those      existing elsewhere in the past were not great, but with      the changes  that have  taken place  all over the world      during the  past few  generations they  have become far      more pronounced.  In the  context of society today, the      caste system  and much  that goes  with it  are  wholly      incompatible, reactionary,  restrictive and barriers to      progress. There  can  be  no  equality  in  status  and      opportunity within  its  framework  nor  can  there  be      political democracy  and much  less economic democracy.      Between these two  conceptions conflict is inherent and      only one  of them can survive." (Jawaharlal Nehru: ’The      Discovery of  India’ 1974  Edn. Chapter  VI at pp. 256-      257).      An examination of the question in the background of the Indian social conditions shows that the expression ’backward classes used  in the Constitution referred only to those who were  born   in  particular   castes,  or  who  belonged  to particular races  or tribes  or religious  minorities  which were backward.      It is  now necessary  to ascertain  the true meaning of the expression  ’backward classes’  found  in  Articles  15, Article  16,   Article  338  (3)  and  Article  340  of  the Constitution. Article 338 and Article 340 are in Part XVI of the Constitution  entitled ’special  provisions relating  to certain  classes’.  The  corresponding  part  in  the  Draft Constitution  was   Part  XIV  entitled  special  provisions relating  to   minorities  which  contained  nine  Articles, Articles 292  to 301.  Article 292 of the Draft Constitution referred to reservation of seats for minorities in the House of the  People, the  minorities being,  the Muslim community and the  Scheduled Castes,  certain Scheduled Tribes and the Indian  Christian   community.  Article  293  of  the  Draft Constitution   made    special   provision   regarding   the representation of the Anglo-Indian community in the House of the People. Article 294 of the Draft Constitution dealt with reservation 460 of seats for the Muslim community, Scheduled Castes, certain A Scheduled Tribes and the Indian Christian community in the State Legislatures.  Article 295  of the  Draft Constitution authorised the  Governor to nominate a representative of the Anglo-lndian community  to a  State Legislature  in  certain cases. Article  296 of  the Draft  Constitution required the Union and  the States  to appoint  members belonging  to all minority communities in the State services consistently with the maintenance of efficiency of administration. Article 297 of the  Draft Constitution  required the  Union  to  appoint members of the Anglo-lndian community in certain services as stated therein  and Article  298 of  the Draft  Constitution

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 84 of 106  

provided for  certain educational  concessions to  the Anglo Indian community  over a  certain specified  period. Article 299 of  the Draft  Constitution required  the  President  to appoint a  Special Officer  for minorities for the Union and the Governor to appoint a Special Officer for minorities for a State.  Administration of  Scheduled areas  and welfare of certain Scheduled  Tribes were entrusted to the President by Article 300  of the Draft Constitution and it made provision for appointment  of a  commission for  that purpose. Article 301 of  the Draft  Constitution authorised  the President to appoint  a  commission  to  investigate  the  conditions  of socially and  educationally backward  classes.  It  read  as follows:           "301. (1)  The President  may by  order appoint  a      Commission consisting  of such persons as he thinks fit      to  investigate   the  conditions’   of  socially   and      educationally backward  classes within the territory of      India and  the difficulties under which they labour and      to make  recommendations as to the steps that should be      taken  by  the  Union  or  any  State  to  remove  such      difficulties and  to improve  their condition and as to      the grants  that should be given for the purpose by the      Union or  any State and the conditions subject to which      such grants  should be  given, and the order appointing      such  Commission  shall  define  the  procedure  to  be      followed by the Commission.           (2) A  Commission so  appointed shall  investigate      the  matters  referred  to  them  and  present  to  the      President a  report setting  out the  facts as found by      them and  making such  recommendations  as  they  think      proper. 461           (3) The President shall cause a copy of the report      so presented, together  with  a  memorandum  explaining  the  A action taken thereon to be laid before Parliament."      The Constituent  Assembly after  considering the report of the Advisory Committee appointed on July 24, 1947 for the purpose of  making its  recommendations  on  the  provisions contained in  Part XIV of the Draft Constitution referred to above adopted a resolution moved by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel which read as follows:           "Resolved that the Constituent Assembly do proceed      to take  into consideration  the Report  dated the 11th      May 1949 on the subject of certain political safeguards      for minorities  submitted  by  the  Advisory  Committee      appointed by  the resolution  of the  Assembly on  24th      January 1 47.      Resolved further-           (i) that  notwithstanding  any  decisions  already      taken by  the Constituent  Assembly in this behalf, the      provisions of  Part X[V  of the  Draft Constitution  of      India  be   so  amended   as  to  give  effect  to  the      recommendations of  the Advisory Committee contained in      the said report; and E           (ii) that  the following  classes in  East Punjab,      namely, Mazhbis,  Ramdasias, Kabirpanthis and Sikligars      be included  in the  list of  Scheduled Castes  for the      Province so  that they would be entitled to the benefit      of representation  in the  Legislatures  given  to  the      Scheduled Castes".      (Vide ’the  Framing of India’s Constitution by B. Shiva Rao, Vol. IV p. 606).      In the  Revised Draft Constitution which was introduced in  the  Constituent  Assembly  on  November  3,  1949,  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 85 of 106  

provisions relating  t minorities  were incorporated in Part XVI and  the title  of that Part read as ’Special Provisions Relating to  Minorities’ and it contained thirteen Articles, Article  330  to  Article  342.  Article  330  provided  for reservation  of  seats  for  Scheduled  Castes  and  certain Scheduled Tribes  in the  Lok Sabha and Article 332 provided for reservation  for them  in the  Legislative Assemblies of States. Article 331 and Article 333 dealt with domination of representatives of the 462 Anglo-Indian community respectively to the Lok Sabha and the A Legislative  Assemblies of  States. Article  334 fixed the period during  which reservations  and nominations  could be made under the above said Articles. Article 335 required the Union and  the States  to recognise the claims of members of the Scheduled  Castes and  the Scheduled Tribes consistently with the  maintenance of efficiency of administration in the making of  appointments by  the Union  or the States, as the case may be. Article 336 contained special provision for the Anglo-Indian community  in certain services during the first two years  after the  commencement of  the Constitution  and Article 337  contained special  provision  with  respect  to educational grants  for  the  benefit  of  the  Anglo-lndian community during  a certain period after the commencement of the Constitution.  Article 338  required  the  President  to appoint a Special Officer for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Article  338(3) stated  that references to Scheduled Castes  and  Scheduled  Tribes  in  Article  338  should  be construed as  references to  such other  backward classes as the  President  might  on  receipt  of  the  report  of  the Commission appointed  under Article 340 by order specify and also to the Anglo-Indian community. Article 340 provided for the  appointment   of  a  Commission  by  the  President  to investigate the  conditions of  socially  and  educationally backward classes  and  the  difficulties  under  which  they labour, Article 341 and Article 342 explained what the terms ’Scheduled Castes’  and ’Scheduled  Tribes’ meant. The above Articles (Art.  330 to  Art. 342 of the Revised Draft of the Constitution)  were   finally  passed   by  the  Constituent Assembly with  the amendment  that for the word ’minorities’ wherever  it  occurred  in  Part  XVI,  the  words  ’certain classes’  be  substituted  The  heading  of  the  Part  was, therefore,  changed   to  ’Special  Provisions  Relating  to certain Classes’.      It is significant that the expression ’backward classes used in  Part XVI  of the Constitution and the particular in Article 338(3)  is used along with the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes  and the  Anglo-Indian  Community.  In  the original Draft  Constitution, the  Muslim community  and the Indian Christian community also had been referred to in Part XVI. In  the course  of the  debates, the  question  of  the members of  the Sikh  community was  along considered  along with these communities. The meaning of backward classes has, therefore, to  be deduced  having regard  to the other words preceding it.  It is  a rule  of statutory construction that where there  are  general  words  following  particular  and specific words, the general words must be confined to things of the  same kind  as those  specified. It is true that this rule which is called as the ejusdem generies rule or 463 the rule  noscitur a socis cannot be carried too far. But it is reasonable  to apply  that rule  where the specific words refer to  a distinct  A genus  or  category.  The  Scheduled Castes are  those castes,  races and  tribes or  parts of or groups  within  the  castes,  races  and  tribes  which  are

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 86 of 106  

specified in the Public Notification issued by the President under Article  341(1). Similarly  Scheduled Tribes are those tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups of within tribes or  tribal communities  which are  specified  in  the Public Notification  issued by  the President  under Article 342(1). This  is clear  from the  definitions of  ’Scheduled Castes’  and  ’Scheduled  Tribes’  in  Article  366(24)  and Article 366(25).  The notifications issued under Article 341 and Article  342 can  be modified  only by a law made by the Parliament (Vide  Article 341(2)  and Article  342(2). It is thus seen  that Part  XVI of  the  Constitution  deals  with certain concessions  extended to  certain castes, tribes and races which are Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and to the Anglo-Indian  community. In the above context if Article 338(3)  and   Article  340  are  construed,  the  expression ’backward classes’  can only refer to certain castes, races, tribes or  communities or parts thereof other than Scheduled Castes, Scheduled  Tribes and  the  Anglo-Indian  community, which are  backward. Thus  view also  gains support from the resolution  regarding   the  aims   and   objects   of   the Constitution  moved   by  Pandit  Jawaharlal  Nehru  in  the Constituent Assembly on December 13, 1946. He sid: E      "I beg to move:      (1)  This Constituent  Assembly declares  its firm  and      solemn resolve  to proclaim  India  as  an  Independent      Sovereign Republic  and  to  draw  up  for  her  future      governance a Constitution;      (2)  Where in the territories that now comprise British      India, the territories that now form the Indian States.      and such  other parts  of India  as are outside British      India at  the States  as well as such other territories      as are  willing to  be constituted into the Independent      Sovereign India, shall be a Union of them all; and      (3)  Where in  the said territories, whether with their      pre sent  boundaries or  with such  others  as  may  be      determined by  the Constituent Assembly and there after      according to the Law of the Constitution, shall 464           possess and retain the status of autonomous Units,      together  with   residuary  powers,  and  exercise  all      powers, and  exercise all  powers and  functions as are      vested in  or assigned to the Union, or as are inherent      or implied in the Union or resulting therefrom; and      (4)  Wherein all  power and  authority of the Sovereign      Independent India,  its constituent parts and organs of      government, are derived from the people; and      (5)  Wherein shall be guaranteed and secured to all the      people  of   India  justice,   social,   economic   and      political; equality  of  status,  of  opportunity,  and      before the law, freedom of thought, expression, belief,      faith,  worship,   vocation,  association  and  action,      subject to law and public morality; and      (6)  Wherein adequate  safeguards shall be provided for      minorities, Backward  and tribal  areas, and  depressed      and other backward classes; and      (7)  Wherein shall  be maintained  the integrity of the      territory of  the Republic  and its sovereign rights on      land, sea,  and air according to Justice and the law of      civilised nations: and      (8)  this  ancient   land  attains   its  rightful  and      honoured place  in the  world and  make  its  full  and      willing contribution  to the  promotion of  world peace      and the welfare of mankind." (Underlining by us)      Clause (6)  of the  above resolution  which  was  later adopted by the Constituent Assembly pledged to make adequate

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 87 of 106  

safeguards in the Constitution for ’minorities, backward and tribal areas  and depressed  and other backward classes’ The above resolution  and the  history of  the enactment of Part XVI of  the Constitution by the Constituent Assembly lead to the conclusion  that backward classes are only those castes, races, tribes or communities, which are identified by birth, which are backward. It is, therefore, difficult to hold that persons or  groups of  persons who  are backward  merely  on account of  poverty which  is traceable  to economic reasons can also  be considered  as backward classes for purposes of Article 16(4) and Part XVI of the Constitution. 465      The word  ’backward’ was  not there  before  the  words ’class of  citizens’ in  Article 10(3) of the original draft of  the  Constitution  (the  personal  Article  16(4)).  The Drafting  Committee  presided  over  by  Dr.  B.R.  Ambedkar deliberately introduced it. Dr. Ambedkar gave the reason for introducing that term as follows:      "Supposing, for  instance, reservations were made for a      community or  a collection of communities, the total of      which came  to something  like 70 per cent of the total      posts under the State and only 30 per cent are retained      as  the   unreserved,  could   anybody  say   that  the      reservation  of   30  per   cent  as  open  to  general      competition would  be satisfactory  from the  point  of      view of  giving effect  to the  first principle, namely      that there  shall be equality of opportunity? It cannot      be in  my judgment. Therefore the seats to be reserved,      if the  reservation is to be consistent with sub-clause      (1) of  Article 10,  must be  confined to a minority of      seats. It  is then  only that the first principle could      find its  place in the Constitution and effective (sic)      in operation.  If Honourable  Member under  stand  this      position then  we have to safeguard two things, namely,      the principle  of equality  of opportunity  and at  the      same time  satisfy the demand of communities which have      not had  so far representation in the state, then, I am      sure they  will agree  that unless  you use  some  such      qualifying phrase  as "backward’  the exception made in      favour of  reservation will  ultimately eat up the rule      altogether Nothing  of the  rule  will  remain."  (Vide      Constituent Assembly  Debates, 1948-1949, Vol. VII, pp.      701-702). F      The Drafting  Committee by  qualifying  the  expression classes of  citizens’ by  ’backward’ in Article 16(4) of the Constitution tried  to reconcile  three different  points of view  and   produced  a   workable  proposition   which  was acceptable to  all, the  three points of view being (1) that there should be equality of opportunity for all citizens and that every individual qualified for a particular post should be free  to apply for that post, to sit for examinations and to have his qualifications tested so as to determine whether he was fit for the post or not and that there ought to be no limitations, there ought to be no hindrance in the operation of the principle of equality of opportunity; (2) that if the principle of equality of opportunity was to be operative the Ought to b no reservations of any sort for any class or 466 community at all and that all citizens if they are qualified should be A placed on the same footing of equality as far as public services  were concerned  and  (3)  that  though  the principle of  equality of opportunity was theoritically good there must  at the  same time  be a  provision made  for the entry of  certain communities which have so far been outside the administration.  The whole  tenor of  discussion in  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 88 of 106  

Constituent Assembly  pointed to  making reservation  for  a minority of  the population  including Scheduled  Castes and Scheduled Tribes  which were  socially backward.  During the discussion, the Constitution (first Amendment) Bill by which Article 15(4)  was  introduced,  Dr.  Ambedkar  referred  to Article 16(4)  and said  that backward  classes are ’nothing else but  a collection  of  certain  castes’  (Parliamentary Debates 1951,  Third Session,  Part Ir Vol. Xll at p. 9007). This statement leads to a reasonable inference that this was the meaning  which  the  Constituent  Assembly  assigned  to classes’ at any rate so far as Hindus were concerned.      In Balaji’s  case (supra)  and  in  Chifralekha’s  case (supra) this Court exhibited a lot of hesitation in equating the expression ’class’ with ’caste’ for purposes of Articles 15(4) and Article 16(4) of the Constitution. It observed, as stated  earlier,  that  while  caste  might  be  a  relevant circumstance to  determine a  backward class,  it could not, however, be  dominant test. One of the reasons given for not accepting caste  insofar as  Hindu community  in which caste system was  prevalent was  concerned as  a dominant test for determining  a   backward  class  was  that  as  there  were communities without  castes, nothing prevented the makers of the Constitution  to use the expression ’backward classes or castes’.  The  juxtaposition  of  the  expression  ’backward classes’  and  ’Scheduled  Castes’  in  Article  15  of  the Constitution, according to the above two decisions, led to a reasonable  inference  that  expression  ’classes’  was  not synonymous  with  ’caste’.  The  Court  while  making  these observations did  not give  adequate importance to the evils of caste  system which had led to the backwardness of people belonging to  certain castes  and the  debates that preceded the enactment  of Part  XVI and  Article 15(4)  and  Article 16(4) of the Constitution- What was in fact overlooked ! was the history of the Indian social institutions. The makers of the Il  Indian Constitution very well knew that there were a number of  i castes  the conditions  of whose  members  were almost similar to the conditions of members belonging to the Scheduled Castes  and to  the Scheduled Tribes and that they also needed  to be  given adequate  protection in order tide over the difficulties in the way of their 467 progress which  were not  so much  due to poverty but due to their birth in a particular caste. As mentioned elsewhere in the  course  of  this  judgement.  the  word  ’classes’  was substituted in  the place  of the  word ’communities’ by the Constituent Assembly  just at  the  last  moment.  The  word community meant a caste amongst Hindus or Muslims, or Indian Christians or  Anglo-Indians. Part  XVI was  not enacted for the purpose  of alleviating the conditions of poorer classes as such which was taken care of by the provisions of Part IV of the  Constitution and  in particular by Article 46 and by Article 14,  Art. 15(1)  and Art.  16(1) of the Constitution which  permitted   classification  of  persons  on  economic grounds for special treatment in order to ensure equality of opportunity to all person.            It is of significance that the views expressed by this Court, however, stood modified by the decisions of this Court in  Minor P.  Rajendran v.  State of Madras & Ors.,(l) State of  Andhra Pradesh & Anr. v. P. Sagar,(2) Triloki Nath & anr. v. State of Jammu Kashmir & Ors.(s) A. Peeriakaruppan etc. v.  State of  Tamil Nadu  & Ors.(4) and State of Andhra Pradesh &  Ors. v. U.S.V. Balram etc.(5) In Rajendran’s case (supra) while  holding  that  the  allocation  of  seats  in Medical Colleges  on the  basis of  the district  to which a candidate belonged  was not  warranted by  Art.  15(4),  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 89 of 106  

Court observed that a caste was also a class of citizens and if the  caste as  a whole  was  socially  and  educationally backward reservation  could be  made in favour of such caste under Art.  1 5(4)  In Sagar’s  case (supra)  reservation of seats was  done solely  on the  basis of caste or community. There appeared  to be  no determination  of the fact whether members belonging to such castes or communities were in fact socially and  educationally backward.  The court struck down the reservation  as being  outside Article  I  C(4)  of  the Constitution. The Court. however, observed at page 600 thus:      ’ In  the context  in which  it occurs  the  expression      "class" means  a  homogeneous  section  of  the  people      grouped together  because of certain likeness or common      traits  and   who  are   identifiable  by  some  common      attributes such  as status,  rank, occupation residence      in a locality, race,      (1) [1968] 2 S.C.R 786.       (2) [1968] 3 S.C.R.595      (3) [1969] 1 S C.R. 103.       (4) [1971] 2 S.C.R. 430.       (5) [1972] 3 S.C.R. 247, 468      religion  and   the  like,  In  determining  whether  a      particular section  forms  a  class,  caste  cannot  be      excluded altogether. But the determination of a class a      test solely  based upon  the caste  or community cannot      also be  accepted. By  cl. (1),  Art. 15  prohibits the      State  from  discriminating  against  any  citizens  on      grounds only  of religion,  race, caste,  sex, place of      birth or  any of  them. By cl. (3) Of Art. 15 the State      is, notwithstanding  the provisions  contained  in  Cl.      (1), permitted  to make special provision for women and      children. By  cl.  (4)  a  special  provision  for  the      advancement of  any socially and educationally backward      classes of  citizens or  for the  Scheduled Castes  and      Scheduled Tribes is outside the purview of cl. (1). But      cl. (4) is an exception to cl. (1). Being an exception,      it cannot  be extended  so as  in effect to destroy the      guarantee of  cl. (1).  The Parliament  has by enacting      cl. (4)  attempted to  balance as  against the right of      equality of  citizens the  special  necessites  of  the      weaker sections  of the  people by allowing a provision      to be  made for their advancement. In order that effect      may be  given to  cl. (4),  it  must  appear  that  the      beneficaries of the special provision are classes which      are backward  socially and  educationally and  they are      other than the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled  Tribes,      and that  the provision  made is for their advancement.      Reservation may  be adopted to advance the interests of      weaker sections  of society, but in doing so, care must      be taken to see that deserving and qualified candidates      are not  excluded from  admission to higher educational      institutions.  The   criterion  for   determining   the      backwardness must  not be  based  solely  on  religion,      race,  caste,   sex,  or   place  of   birth,  and  the      backwardness  being  social  and  educational  must  be      similar to  the backwardness  from which  the Scheduled      Castes and  the  Scheduled  Tribes  suffer."  (emphasis      added)      In Triloki  Nath’s case  (supra) which  was a  case  in which  Article   16(4)  came   up   for   consideration,   a Constitution Bench of this Court observed at page 105 thus -      "Article 16  in the first instance by cl. (2) prohibits      discrimination on  the ground, inter alia, of religion,      race, caste,  place of  birth, residence and permits an

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 90 of 106  

    exception to be 469      made in the matter of reservation in favour of backward      classes of citizens. The expression "backward class" is      not used  as synonymous  with "backward caste" or "back      ward community".  The members  of an  entire  caste  or      community may  in the  social, economic and educational      scale of  values at a given time be backward and may on      that account  be treated  as a backward class, but that      is  not   because  they  are  members  of  a  caste  or      community,  but  because  they  form  a  class  In  its      ordinary connotation  the expression  "class"  means  a      homogenous  section  of  the  people  grouped  together      because of certain likenesses or common traits, and who      are identifiable  by some  common  attributes  such  as      status, rank, occupation, residence in a locality, race      religion and  the like.  But for  the purpose  or  Art.      16(41 in determining whether a section forms a class, a      test solely  based on caste, community, race, religion,      sex, descent,  place of  birth or  residence cannot  be      adopted,  because   it  would   directly   offend   the      Constitution." (emphasis added)      In Peeriokaruppan’s  case (supra) Hegde. J. Observed at page 443 thus;           "A caste has always been recognised as a class. In      construing the  expression "classes  of  His  Majesty’s      subjects" found  in s.  153-A Or the Indian Penal Code,      Wassoodew, J.  Observed in Narayan Vasudev v. Emperor A      I.R. 1943 Bom. 379.                "In my  opinion’ the  expression ’classes  of           His Majesty’s  subjects’ in  Section 153-A  of the           Code is  used in  restrictive sense  as denoting a           collection of  individuals  or  groups  bearing  a           common  and   exclusive   designation   and   also           possessing common  and  exclusive  characteristics           which may be associated with their origin, race or           religion, and  that the  term ’class’  within that           section carries  with it  the  idea  of  numerical           strength so  large as could be grouped in a single           homogeneous community,"           In Paragraph 10, Chapter V of the backward Classes Commission’s Report, it is observed: 470           "We tried  to avoid caste but we find it difficult      to A ignore caste in the present prevailing conditions.      We  wish   it  were  easy  to  dissociate  from  social      backwardness at  the present  juncture. In modern times      anybody can  take to any profession. The Brahman taking      to tailoring, does not become a tailor by caste, nor is      his social  status lowered  as a Brahman. A Brahman may      be a  seller of  boots and  shoes, and  yet his  social      status is  not lowered  thereby.  Social  backwardness,      therefore,  is   not  today   due  to   the  particular      profession of  a person,  but we cannot escape caste in      considering the social backwardness in India"      Paragraph 11 of that Report it is stated:           "It  is   not  wrong   to   assume   that   social      backwardness has largely contributed to the educational      backwardness of a large number of social groups."      Finally in  Paragraph 13,  the Committee concludes with      following observations:           "All this  goes to  prove that social backwardness      is  mainly   based  on   racial,  tribal,   caste   and      denominationals differences."           The learned  Judge then proceeded to state at page

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 91 of 106  

    444:           "There is  no gainsaying  the fact  that there are      numerous castes  in this country which are socially and      educationally backward. To ignore their existence is to      ignore the facts of life. Hence we are enable to uphold      the contention  that impugned  reservation  is  not  in      accordance with  Art.  15(4).  But  all  the  same  the      Government should  not proceed on the basis that once a      class is  considered as  a  backward  class  it  should      continue to  be backward  class for  all times. Such an      approach  would   defeat  the   very  purpose   of  the      reservation because  once a  class reaches  a stage  of      progress which  some modern  writers call  as take  off      stage then  competition is  necessary for  their future      progress.  The  Government  should  always  keep  under      review the  question of  reservation of  seats and only      the classes which 471      are really  socially and  educationally backward should      be  allowed   to  have   the  benefit  of  reservation.      Reservation of  A seats should not be allowed to become      a vested interest. The fact that candidates of backward      classes have  secured about 50 per cent of the seats in      the general pool does show that the time has come for a      de novo  comprehensive examination  of the question. It      must be  remembered that g the Government’s decision in      this regard is open to judical review."      In Balaram’s  case (supra) the State was the appellant. it had  come up  in appeal  against the judgment of the High Court of  Andhra Pradesh  which had  struck down  its  order making reservation  of seats  of seats  under Article 15(4). This Court  allowed  the  appeal  upholding  the  Government order, Vaidialingam,  J.  in  the  course  of  his  judgment observed at page 280 thus:-           "Art. 15(4)  will have  to be  given effect  to in      order to assist the weaker sections of the citizens, as      the State has been charged with such duty. No doubt, we      are aware  that any  provision made  under this  clause      must be  within the  well defined limits and should not      be on  the basis of caste alone. But it should not also      be missed  that a caste is also a class of citizens and      that a  caste as such may be socially and educationally      backward. If after collecting the necessary date, it is      found that  the  caste  as  a  whole  is  socially  and      educationally backward, in our opinion, the reservation      made  of   such  persons   will  have   to  be   upheld      notwithstanding the fact that a few individuals in that      group may  be both socially and educationally above the      general average.  There ii  no gainsaying the fact that      there are  numerous castes  in the  country, which  are      socially and  educationally backward  and  therefore  a      suitable provision will have to be made by the State as      charged in Art. 15(4) to safeguard their interest."      The  learned  Judge  felt  that  the  Backward  Classes Commission on the basis of whose Report the Government order had been  passed had  given good  reasons in  support of its recommendations.  Accordingly   the  Government   order  was upheld. 472      If we  depart from  the view that caste or community is an important  relevant  factor  in  determining  social  and educational backwardness  for purposes of Article 15 (4) and Article 16  (4) of the Constitution, several distortions are likely to  follow and may take us away from the sole purpose for which  those  constitutional  provisions  were  enacted.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 92 of 106  

Several factors  such as physical disability, poverty, place of habitation,  the fact of belonging to a freedom fighter’s family, the  fact of  belonging to the family of a member of the armed  forces might  each become  a sole  factor for the purpose of  Article 15  (4) or Article 16 (4) which were not at all  intended to  be resorted  to by  the State  for  the purpose of  granting relief  in such cases. While relief may be given  in such cases under Article 14, Article 15 (1) and Article  16   (1)  by   adopting  a  rational  principle  of classification, Article  15 (4) and Article 16 (4) cannot be applied to  then. Article  15 (4)  and Article  16  (4)  are intended  for   the  benefit   of  those   who   belong   to castes/communities which  are ’traditionally disfavoured and which have suffered societal discrimination’ in the  past.  The other  factors mentioned above were never in the contemplation  of  the  makers  of  the  Constitution  while enacting these clauses.      In D.N. Chanchala v. State of Mysore and Ors. etc.(1) a classification based on some of these factors was upheld but not under  Article 1 5 (4). The observation made in State of Kerala  v.   Kumari  T.P.  Roshana  and  Anr.(2)  that  ’the principle of reservation with weightage for the geographical area of  Malabar District has our approval in endorsement of the view  of the High Court’ is outside the scope of Article 15 (4)  even though  it may  be sustained  under Article 14. While caste or community is a relevant factor in determining the social  and educational  backwardness, it cannot be said that all  members of a caste need be treated as backward and entitled to  reservation under  Article 15 (4) or Article 16 (4). Caste-cum  means test  would  be  a  rational  test  in identifying persons who are entitled to the benefit of those provisions. This  principle has  received acceptance  at the hands of  this Court in Kumari K.S. Jayasree and Anr. v. The State of  Kerala and  Anr.,(2) In  that  case  a  Commission appointed by  the Government  of  the  State  of  Kerala  to enquire into  the social  and  economic  conditions  of  the people of that State and      (1) [1971] Supp. S.C.R. 60       (2) [1979] 2 S.C.R. 974.       (3) [1977] 1 S.C.R. 194. 473 to recommend  as to  what sections  of the  people should be extended  the   benefits  under   Article  15   (4)  of  the Constitution found that only the rich amongst certain castes or communities  were enjoying  the benefit  of  reservations made earlier.  It,  therefore,  recommended  adoption  of  a means-cum-caste/community test  for determining the sections of the  people who  should be  given the  benefit under  the relevant constitutional  provisions.  The  State  Government accordingly stipulated  that applicants  who were members of certain castes  or communities  and whose  family income was less than  Rs.  1(),000  per  year  were  only  entitled  to reservation under  Article 15  (4). The  petitioner  in  the above case  who belonged  to one  such community  but  whose family income  was above  Rs. 10,000 per year questioned the order before  the Kerala  High Court  on the ground that the imposition   of   the   ceiling   of   family   income   was unconstitutional. The  learned Single  Judge who heard the ’ petition allowed  it. The  Division Bench of the Kerala High Court, however,  reversed the decision of the learned Single Judge and dismissed the petition. On appeal, the Court while affirming the  decision of  the Division  Bench in the above case on  the question  of social  backwardness  observed  at pages 199-200 thus:           "In ascertaining social backwardness of a class of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 93 of 106  

    citizens it may not be irrelevant to consider the caste      of the  group of citizens. Caste cannot however be made      the sole  or dominant  test. Social  backwardness is in      the ultimate  analysis the result of poverty to a large      extent. Social  backwardness which results from poverty      is likely  to be  aggravated by considerations of their      caste. This  shows the  relevance  of  both  caste  and      poverty in  deter- mining the backwardness of citizens.      Poverty by  itself is  not the  determining  factor  of      social backwardness. Poverty is relevant in the context      of social  backwardness. The  Commission found that the      lower   income    group   constitutes    socially   and      educationally  backward   classes.  The  basis  of  the      reservation is  not income  but social  and educational      backwardness  determined   on  the  basis  of  relevant      criteria. If  any classification of backward classes of      citizens is  based solely  on the caste of the citizens      it will  perpetuate the vice of caste system. Again, if      the classification  is based  solely on poverty it will      not be  logical. The society is taking steps for uplift      of the people. In such a task groups or classes who are      socially and 474 educationally backward  are helped by the society. That A is the philosophy  of our  Constitution. It  is in this context that social  backwardness  which  results  from  poverty  is likely to be magnified by caste considerations. Occupations, place  of   habitation  may  also  be  relevant  factors  in determining who  are  socially  and  educationally  backward classes.  Social   and  economic  considerations  come  into operation in  solving the  problem and  evolving the  proper criteria of  determining  which  classes  are  socially  and educationally  backward.   That  is   why  our  Constitution provided  for  special  consideration  socially  and  educa- tionally backward  classes of  citizens  as  also  Scheduled Castes and  Tribes. It  is only by directing the society and the State  to offer  them  all  facilities  for  social  and educational uplift that the problem is solved. It is in that context that  the Commission  in the present case found that income of the classes of citizens mentioned in Appendix VIII was a  relevant  factor  in  determining  their  social  and educational backwardness."      When once  the relevance  of caste  is not  adhered  to several difficulties  might arise  as can  be seen  from the decision in  the State of Uttar Pradesh v. Pradip Tandon and Ors.,(1) In  that case the Court had to examine the validity of a  Government order  which had  made reservation of seats under Article  15 (4) in favour of two classes of students - (1) those  who came  from rural areas and (2) those who came from hill  areas and Uttrakhand. The High Court of Allahabad upheld the said reservations in Subhash Chandra v. The State of U.P.  and ors.(2) but struck them down in a later case in Dilip Kumar  v. The  Government of  U.P. and Ors.(3) without noticing its  earlier  decision  in  Subash  Chandra’s  case (supra) When  the same question came before this Court in an appeal  preferred   by  the   State  Government,  the  State Government  attempted   to  justify  the  classification  of students for admission into medical colleges as stated above on the  ground that it was a notorious fact that rural, hill and Uttrakhand  areas  were  socially  backward  because  of extreme   poverty;    that   those   areas   were   backward educationally because the      (1) [1975] 2 S.C.R. 761.       (2) A.l.R. 1973 All. 295.       (3) A.I.R. 1973 All. 592.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 94 of 106  

475 standard  of  literacy  was  poor  and  there  was  lack  of educational facilities  and that there was dearth of doctors in  the   said  areas.   A  The  geographical,  territorial, historical and  the economic  conditions in  the said  areas were emphasised  to support the classification. In the State of Uttar Pradesh v. Pradip Tandon’s case (supra) Court first rejected  the   plea  that   party  could   be  a  basis  of classification for  purposes of Art. I (4) in these terms at page 7           "In Balaji’s  case (supra)  the  Court  said  that      social backwardness  is on  the ultimate  analysis  the      result of  poverty to  a  large  extent  and  that  the      problem of  back  ward  classes  is  in  substance  the      problem of  rural India.  Extracting these observations      the Attorney General contended that poverty is not only      relevant but is one, of the elements in determining the      social backwardness.  We are  unable to accept the test      of  poverty   as  the   determining  factor  of  social      backwardness." D      Then it  held that  reservation for  rural areas on the ground of  poverty was  unconstitutional.  In  doing  so  it observed at page 769 thus:           "The  reservation   for  rural   areas  cannot  be      sustained on  the ground that the rural areas represent      socially  and   educationally   backward   classes   of      citizens. This  reservation appears  to be made for the      majority population  of the  State. 80  per cent of the      population of  the State cannot be a homogeneous class.      Poverty  in   rural  areas   cannot  be  the  basis  of      classification to  support reservation for rural areas.      Poverty  is  found  in  all  parts  of  India.  In  the      instructions for  reservation of  seats it  is provided      that in  the application  form a candidate for reserved      seats from rural areas must submit a certificate of the      District  Magistrate   of  the  District  to  which  he      belonged that  he was  born in  rural area  and  had  a      permanent home  there, and is residing there or that he      was born  in India  and his  parents and  guardians are      still living there and earn their livelihood there. The      incident of  birth in  rural areas  is made  the  basic      qualification. No  reservation can be made on the basis      of place of birth, as this would offend Article 15. " 476      But it  upheld the  reservations made  in favour of the hill and  A Uttrakhand areas with these observations at page 767:           "The hill  and Uttrakhand  areas in  Uttar Pradesh      are instance  of socially  and  educationally  backward      classes for  these reasons.  Backwardness is  judged by      economic basis  that each region has its own measurable      possibilities for  the maintenance  of  human  numbers,      standards  of   living  and  fixed  property.  From  an      economic point of view the classes of citizens are back      ward when  they do not make effective use of resources.      When large  areas of land maintain a sparse, disorderly      and illiterate  population whose  property is small and      negligible  the   element  of  social  backwardness  is      observed. When  effective territorial specialisation is      not possible  in the  absence of means of communication      and technical  processes as  in the hill and Uttrakhand      areas the  people  are  socially  backward  classes  of      citizens. Neglected  opportunities and people in remote      places raise walls of social backwardness of people.           Educational  backwardness   is  ascertained   with

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 95 of 106  

    reference  to   these  factors.   Where   people   have      traditional apathy  for education  on account of social      and   environ   mental   conditions   or   occupational      handicaps,  it   is  an   illustration  of  educational      backwardness.  The   hill  and   Uttrakhand  areas  are      inaccessible. There is lack of educational institutions      and educational  aids People in the hill and Uttrakhand      areas illustrate  the educationally backward classes of      citizens because  lack of  educational facilities  keep      them stagnant  and they have neither meaning and values      nor awareness for education."      The reading  of the  above passages shows that there is inherent inconsistency  between one part of the decision and the other.  The Court  could not  have arrived  at  the  two divergent conclusions  set  out  above  since  many  of  the reasons urged by the State Government were almost identical. This is  due to the earlier approach adopted by the Court to the question.  If caste had been taken into consideration as a relevant  test which  could not  be ignored in determining the classes  entitled to  the benefit  of Article 15 (4) and Art. 16  (4), there  would have  been no  room for the above inconsistency. 477      Article 14  of the  Constitution consists of two parts. It asks  the State not to deny to any person equality before law. It  also asks  A  the  State  not  to  deny  the  equal protection of the laws. Equality before law connotes absence of  any   discrimination  in   law.  The  concept  of  equal protection required  the  State  to  meet  out  differential treatment to  persons in  different situations  in order  to establish an  equilibrium amongst  all. This is the basis of the rule  that equals should be treated equally and unequals must be  treated unequally if the doctrine of equality which is one  of the  corner stones  of our  Constitution is to be duly implemented.  In order  to do justice amongst unequals, the State  has  to  resort  to  compensatory  or  protective discrimination, Article  15 (4)  and Article  16 (4)  of the Constitution were  enacted as  measures of  compensatory  or protective  discriminations   to  grant  relief  to  persons belonging to socially oppressed castes and minorities. Under them, it  is possible to provide for reservation of seats in educational institutions and of posts in Government services to such  persons only.  But if  there are persons who do not belong to  socially oppressed  castes and minorities but who otherwise belong  to weaker  sections, due to poverty, place of habitation,  want of  equal opportunity etc. the question arises whether  such reservation can be made in their favour under any  other  provision  of  the  Constitution  such  as Article 14,  Article 15  (1), Article  16 (1) or Article 46. The decision  in State of Kerala and Anr. v. N.M. Thomas and Ors.(l) which  was rendered  by 15  a Bench of seven learned Judges of  this Court  attempted  to  deal  with  the  above question. The  facts of that case were these: Rule 13 (a) of the Kerala  State Subordinate  Service Rules,  1958 provided that no  person would  be eligible  for appointment  to  any service  or  any  post  unless  he  possessed  such  special qualifications and had passed such special tests as might be prescribed in  that behalf  in the  Ir  Special  Rules.  For promotion of  a lower division clerk to the next higher post of upper  division clerk,  the Government prescribed certain departmental tests.  By Rule  13A which was introduced later on temporary  exemption was given for a period of two years. That Rule  also provided  that an  employee who did not pass the unified  departmental tests  within the  period  of  two years from  the date  of introduction  of the tests would be

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 96 of 106  

reverted to  the lower post and further stated that he would not be eligible for appointment under that Rule. Proviso (2) to this Rule gave temporary exemption for an extended period of two years in the case of candidates belonging      (1) [1976] I S.C.R 906. 478   to   Scheduled  Castes  and  Scheduled  Tribes.  When  the Government  A  found  that  a  large  number  of  candidates belonging to  Scheduled Castes  and  Scheduled  Tribes  were facing reversion  under that  Rule, on a representation made on their  behalf, it  gave exemption  to them  for a further period of two years by promulgating Rule 13A. As a result of this Rule, respondent No. I in the above case who had passed the  special   test  in  1971  was  not  promoted  but  some candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes who had not passed the tests were promoted. Respondent No. I there fore  challenged the  validity of  Rule 13A before the High Court  of Kerala on the ground that it violated Article 16 (1)  of the  Constitution. The High Court struck down the Rule holding that it was outside the scope of Article 16 (4) and therefore  was  violative  of  Article  16  (1)  of  the Constitution The  State Government  questioned in  the above case before  this Court  the correctness  of the decision of tho High Court. From the facts narrated above, it is obvious that the  case did  not concern  itself with  reservation of posts in  the higher  cadre as  such but  only involved  the classification of  employees of  Government into two groups- those belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and those who  did not  belong to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes for  purposes of  given exemption from possessing one of  the   minimum  qualifications   i.e.  from  passing  the prescribed tests  during a  further period  of two  years 13 Ray, C.J.  upheld the  Rule by  upholding the classification under Article  14 and  Article 16  (1).  The  learned  Chief Justice observed at page 933 thus:           "All legitimate methods are available for equality      of  opportunity  in  services  under  Article  16  (1).      Article 16  (4) is  affirmative whereas  Article 14  is      negative in  language. Article  16 (4) indicates one of      the methods  of achieving  equality embodied in Article      16 (1).  Article 16 (1) using the expression "equality"      makes it  relatable to  all matters  of employment from      appointment  through   promotion  and   termination  to      payment of pension and gratuity. Article 16 (1) permits      classification on  the basis  of object  and purpose of      law or  State action  except  classification  involving      discrimination prohibited  by  Article  16  (2).  Equal      protection of laws necessarily involves classification.      The validity  of the  classification must  be  adjudged      with   reference   to   the   purpose   of   law.   The      classification in the present case is justified because 479      the purpose  of classification  is to enable members of      Scheduled Castes and Tribes to find representation by A      promotion to  a limited  extent. From the point of view      of time a differential treatment is given to members of      Scheduled Castes  and Tribes  for the purpose of giving      them equality consistent with efficiency".      Khanna, J.  who upheld  the judgment  of the High Court was of the view that since the impugned Rule did not get the protection of  Article 16  (4) which  was the only provision under which preferential treatment could be given to members belonging  to   backward  classes,   Scheduled  Castes   and Scheduled Tribes,  the Rule could not be upheld on the basis of classification under Article 14 and Article 16 (1) of the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 97 of 106  

Constitution. The  learned Judge  observed at  pages 939-940 thus;           "It has  been argued  on behalf  of the appellants      that equality  of treatment  does not forbid reasonable      classification. Reference  in this  context is  made to      the well  accepted principle  that Article  14  of  the      Constitution forbids  class legislation  but  does  not      forbid classification.  Permissible classification,  it      is equally  well established,  must be  founded  on  an      intelligible differential  which distinguishes  persons      or things  that arc  grouped together  from others left      out of  the group  and the  differential  must  have  a      rational relation  to the  object sought to be achieved      by the  statute in  question. It is urged that the same      principle should apply when the court is concerned with      the equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters      P relating  to employment  or appointment to any office      under the  State. In  this respect  I may  observe that      this   Court    has   recognised   the   principle   of      classification in  the context of clause (1) of article      16 in matters where appointments are from two different      sources, e.g. guards and station masters, promotees and      direct  recruits,  degree  holder  and  diploma  holder      engineers. [See  All India  Station Masters  and Asstt.      station Masters’  Assn. and  Ors. v.  General  Manager,      Central Railway  and Ors.  [1960) 2  S.C.R.  311,  S.G.      Jaisinghani v.  Union of India and Ors. [1967] 2 S.C.R.      703 and  State of Jammu & Kashmir v. Triloki Nath Khesa      and Ors.  [1974] I S.C.R. 771.) The question with which      we are concerned, however, is 480 whether we  can extend the above principle of classification so as  to allow  preferential treatment  to employees on the ground that  they are  members of  the scheduled  castes and scheduled tribes.  So far as this question is concerned I am of the view that the provision of preferential treatment for members of  backward classes, including scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, is that contained in clause (4) of article 16 which  permits reservation of posts for them. There is no scope for  spelling out such preferential treatment from the language of clause (1) of article 16 because the language of that clause  does not  warrant any preference to any citizen against another  citizen. The opening words of clause (4) of article 16  that "nothing  in this article shall prevent the State from  making any  provision  for  the  reservation  of appointments  or  posts  in  favour  of  backward  class  of citizens’ indicate that but for clause (4) it would not have been permissible  to make any reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens."      Khanna, J. proceeded to observe at page 944 thus:           "The matter  can also  be locked  at from  another      angle.  If   it  was  permissible  to  accord  favoured      treatment to  members of  backward classes under clause      (1) of  article 16,  there would have been no necessity      of inserting  clause (4)  in article  16. Clause (4) in      Article 16 in such an event would have to be treated as      wholly superfluous  and redundant.  The normal  rule of      interpretation is that no provision of the Constitution      to be  treated as  redundant and superfluous. The Court      would, therefore,  be reluctant  to accept a view which      would have  the  effect  of  rendering  clause  (4)  of      Article 16 redundant and superfluous".      Mathew, J.  more or  less agreed with Ray, C.J. He said at pages 954-955 thus:           "It is  said  that  Article  16  (4)  specifically

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 98 of 106  

    provides for reservation of posts in favour of backward      classes which  according to  the decision of this Court      would  include   the  power   of  the   State  to  make      reservation at the 481      stage of  promotion also  and therefore  Article 16 (1)      cannot include within its compass the power to give any      adventitious aids  by legislation  or otherwise  to the      back ward  classes which  would  derogate  from  strict      numerical equality.  If reservation is necessary either      at the initial stage or at the stage of promotion or at      both to  ensure for the members of the Scheduled Castes      and Scheduled  Tribes equality  of opportunity  in  the      matter of  employment, l  see no reason why that is not      permissible under  Article 16  (1) as  that alone might      put them  on a  parity with  the forward communities in      the matter  of achieving  the result  which equality of      opportunity would produce. Whether there is equality of      opportunity can be gauged only by the equality attained      in the  result. Formal  equality of  opportunity simply      enables people  with more education and intelligence to      capture  all  the  posts  and  to  win  over  the  less      fortunate  in   education  and  talent  even  when  the      competition is  fair. Equality of result is the test of      equality of opportunity".      Beg, J.  (as he  then was)  agreed  with  the  view  of Khanna, J. that the principle of classification could not be extended to  cases of  this nature  but upheld  the Rule  as squarely falling  within the scope of Article 16 (4) itself. He observed at page 959:           "Strictly speaking, the view adopted by my learned      brother  Khanna,   that  the   ambit  of   the  special      protection  of  "equality  of  opportunity  in  matters      relating  to   public  service",   which  can  be  made      available to  members of  backward classes of citizens,      is exhausted  by Article  16 (4)  of the  Constitution,      seems inescapable. Article 16 is, after all, a facet of      the grand  principles embraced  by Article  14  of  our      Constitution. It  guarantees: "Equality  of opportunity      in matters  of  public  appointment".  It  does  so  in      absolute terms.  It is  a necessary  consequence and  a      special application of Article 14 in an important field      where denial  of  equality  of  opportunity  cannot  be      permit ted.  While Article 16 (1) sets out the positive      aspect of  equality of  opportunity in matters relating      to employment  by the  State, Article 16 (2) negatively      prohibits  discrimination   on  the  grounds  given  in      Article 16 (2) in the area covered by Article 16 (1) of      the Constitution. If 482      Scheduled Castes  do  not  fall  within  the  ambit  of      Article  16 (2), but as a "backward class" of citizens,      escape  the   direct  prohibition  it  is  because  the      provisions of  Article  16  (4)  make  such  an  escape      possible for  them. They could also avoid the necessary      consequences of  the positive mandate of Article 16 (1)      if they  come within  the only  exception contained  in      Article 16  (4) of  the  Constitution.  I  respectfully      concur with my learned brother Khanna and Gupta that it      would be  dangerous to  extend the limits of protection      against the  operation of  the principle of equality of      opportunity  in   this   field   beyond   its   express      constitutional authorisation by Article 16 (4) ’.      Beg, J.  (as he then was) proceeded to hold at page 961 thus:

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 99 of 106  

         "Members of a backward class could be said to be discriminated against  if severer  tests were prescribed for them. But,  this is  not the position in the case before us. All promotees,  belonging to any class, caste, or creed, are equally subjected  to efficiency  tests of the same type and standard. The  impugned rules  do not  dispense  with  these tests for  any class  or group. Indeed, such tests could not be dispensed  with for employees from Scheduled Castes, even as a  backward class,  keeping in  view  the  provisions  of Article 335  of the  Constitution. All  that happens here is that the  backward class  of employees  is  given  a  longer period of  time to pass the efficiency tests and prove their merits as  determined by such tests. It has been, therefore, argued that, in this respect, there is substantial equality. In other words, the argument is that if Article 16 (1) could be interpreted  a little less rigidly and more liberally the discrimination involved  here will not fall outside it. Even if this  was a  tenable view,  I would,  for all the reasons given here,  prefer to  find the  justification, if  this is possible, in  the  express  provisions  of  Article  16  (4) because this  is where  such a  justification should  really lie."      Krishna Iyer,  J. after  recording the statement of the Advocate General  for Kerala  that the  Rule  could  not  be sustained under  Article 16  (4) upheld  it under article 14 and Article 16 (1) as it 483 related to  members belonging  to the  Scheduled Castes  and Scheduled Tribes. Perhaps he would have struck down the Rule if the  benefit A  of the  Rule had  been extended  to other backward classes  as can  be seen from the following passage occurring at page 981:           "If Art.  14 admits  of reasonable classification,      so does  Art. 16(1)  and this Court has held so. In the      present case, the economic advancement and promotion of      the  claims   of  the   grossly  under-represented  and      pathetically neglected  classes, otherwise described as      Scheduled Castes  and  Scheduled  Tribes,  consistently      with the  maintenance of  administrative efficiency, is      the object, constitutionally sanctioned by Arts. 46 and      335 and  reasonably accommodated  in  Art.  16(1).  The      differentia so  loudly obtrusive,  is the dismal social      milieu of  harijans.  Certainly  this  has  a  rational      relation to the object set out above. I must repeat the      note  of   caution  earlier   struck.  Not   all  caste      backwardness is recognised in this formula. To do so is      subversive of  both Art.  16(1)  and  (2).  The  social      disparity must  be so  grim and substantial as to serve      as a foundation for benign discrimination. If we search      for such  a class,  we cannot  find any  large  segment      other than  the Scheduled  Castes and Scheduled Tribes.      Any other caste, securing exemption from Art. 16(1) and      (2), by exerting political pressure or other influence,      will   run    the   high   risk   of   unconstitutional      discrimination. If  the real basis of classification is      caste masked  as backward  class, the Court must strike      at   such    communal   manipulation.   Secondly,   the      Constitution recognizes  the claims  of  only  harijans      (Art. 335) and not of every backward class. The profile      of Art. 46 is more or less the same. So, we may readily      hold that  casteism cannot  come back  by the back door      and, except in exceptionally rare cases, no class other      than  Harijans   can  jump   the  gauntlet   of  ’equal      opportunity’ guarantee.  Their only  hope  is  in  Art.      16(4)". (Emphasis supplied).

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 100 of 106  

    Gupta, J.  agreed generally  with Khanna, J. and upheld the judgment of the High Court. Gupta, 1. after referring to Article 335 observed at page 986 thus: H           "This Article  does not  create any  right in  the      members of  the  Scheduled  Castes  and  the  Scheduled      Tribes which 484      they might  claim in  the  matter  of  appointments  to      services A  and  posts;  one  has  to  look  elsewhere,      Article 16(4)  for instance,  to find  out  the  claims      conceded to  them. Article  335 says  that such  claims      shall be  considered consistently  with  administrative      efficiency, thus  is a provision which does not enlarge      but qualify  such claims as they may have as members of      the Scheduled  Castes or Scheduled Tribes. Article 335,      it  seems   clear,  cannot  furnish  any  clue  to  the      understanding of Article 16(1)".      Fazal Ali,  J. also  upheld  the  impugned  Rule  under Article 16(1). The learned Judge said at page 1001 thus: "      "Article 335  of the Constitution contains a mandate to      the State  for considering the claims of the members of      tho  Scheduled   Castes  and   the   scheduled   tribes      consistently with  the  maintenance  of  efficiency  of      administration. By  giving the  special concessions  to      the promotees  this man  date is sought to be obeyed by      the Government.  Mr. T.S.  Krishnamoorthy Iyer, counsel      for the  respondent No.  I submitted  that the  mandate      given in  Art. 335  is  violated  because  by  granting      exemption to  the members  of the  scheduled castes and      tribes the standard of efficiency of the services would      be impaired.  We are, however, unable to agree with the      argument. Both  the respondent  No. I and the promotees      were members  of the  same service and had been working      as Lower  Division Clerks  for a  pretty long time. The      promotees were  members of  the  scheduled  castes  and      tribes are  admittedly senior  to respondent  No. I and      have gained  more experience. Further the rule does not      grant complete  exemption to the promotees from passing      the test;  it only  provides for  grant of extension of      time to  enable  them  to  clear  the  test.  In  these      circumstances it cannot be held that the State’s action      in incorporating  r. 13-AA  in  any  way  violates  the      mandate contained  in Art. 335. In these circumstances,      therefore, I  am clearly  satisfied that  the concesion      given   in   r.   13-AA   amounts   to   a   reasonable      classification which  can be  made under  Art. 16(1) of      the Constitution  and does  not amount to the selection      of the  respondent No.  1 for hostile discrimination so      as to be violative of Art. 16(1) of the Constitution of      India" 485      But Fazal  Ali, J.  was,  however,  of  the  view  that Article 16(4) of the Constitution was a complete code so far as reservation  of posts  A was concerned. The learned Judge observed at page 1002 thus:           "Clause (4)  of Art. 16 of the Constitution cannot      be read  in isolation  but has  to be  read as part and      parcel of  Art. 16(1) & (2). Suppose there are a number      of backward  classes who  form a sizable section of the      population of  the country  but  are  not  properly  or      adequately represented  in the services under the State      the question  that arises is that can be done to enable      them to  join the  services and  have a  sense of equal      participation. One  course  is  to  make  a  reasonable      classification under  Art. 16(1) in the manner to which

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 101 of 106  

    I have  already adverted  in great  detail.  The  other      method to  achieve the  end may  be  to  make  suitable      reservation for  the backward  classes in such a way so      that the  inadequate  representation  of  the  backward      classes in  the services is made adequate. This form of      classification which is referred to as reservation, is,      in my  opinion, clearly  covered by  Art. 16(4)  of the      Constitution which  is completely  exhaustive  on  this      point. That  is to  say clause (4) of Art. 16 is not an      exception  to  Art.  14  in  the  sense  that  whatever      classification can  be made  can be  done only  through      clause (4)  of Art. 16. Clause (4) of Art. 16, however,      is  an   explanation  containing   an  exhaustive   and      exclusive provision  regarding reservation which is one      of the forms of classification. Thus clause (4) of Art.      16 deals  exclusively with  reservation and  not  other      forms of  classifiable which  can be  made  under  Art.      16(1) itself.  Since clause  (4) is a special provision      regarding reservation,  it can  safely be  held that it      overrides Art.  16(1) to that extent and no reservation      can be made under Art. 16(1)". (Emphasis added)      The result  is that  at least according to four learned Judges  -   Khanna;  Beg,   Gupta  and  Fazal  Ali,  JJ.  no reservation of  posts can be made in Government services for backward classes  including Scheduled  Castes and  Scheduled Tribes under  Article 14  or  Article  16(1).  According  to Krishna Iyer,  J. preferential treatment as was done in this case on  the basis  of classification  ordinarily  could  be given under  Article  16(1)  to  the  Scheduled  Castes  and Scheduled Tribes  only. Other  backward classes  could  not, except in  exceptionally rare  cases be  extended  the  same benefit and  their  only  hope  was  Article  16(4)  of  the constitution, 486      Now reverting  to the  power of  the Government to make reservations under  Article 15(4)  and Article  16(4) of the Constitution, we  may state  thus: The  determination of the question whether the members belonging to a caste or a group or a community are backward for the purpose of Article 15(4) and Article  16(4) of  the Constitution  is no doubt left to the Government. But it is not open to the Government to call any caste or group or community as backward according to its sweet will  and pleasure and extend the benefits that may be granted under  those provisions  to such  caste or  group or community.  The   exercise  of  uncontrolled  power  by  the Government in  this regard may lead to political favouritism leading to  denial of the just requirements of classes which are truly  backward. The power of the Government to classify any caste  or group  or community  as  backward  has  to  be exercised in  accordance with  the guidelines  that  can  be easily gathered  from the  Constitution. It  is now accepted that the  expressions ’socially  and educationally  backward classes of  citizens’ and  ’the  Scheduled  Castes  and  the Scheduled Tribes’  in  Article  15(4)  of  the  Constitution together are  equivalent to backward classes of citizens’ in Article  16(4).   Dealing  with  the  question  whether  any particular caste  or group  or community could be treated as socially and  educationally backward for purposes of Article 15(4), the  Court observed  in Balaji’s case (supra) at page 465 thus:      "Therefore, we  are not  satisfied that  the State  was      justified in taking the view that communities or castes      whose ave  rage of  student population was the same as,      or just  below, the State average, should be treated as      educationally back  ward classes  of citizens.  If  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 102 of 106  

    test has  to be  applied be  a reference  to the  State      average of  student population,  the legitimate view to      take would  be  that  the  classes  of  citizens  whose      average  is  well  or  substantially  below  the  State      average can be treated as educationally backward."      This was further explained by Shah, J. (as he then was) in Sagar’s  case (supra) when he observed that the criterion for deter  mining the  backwardness must not be based solely on religion,  race, caste,  sex or  place of  birth and  the backwardness being social and educational must be similar to the backwardness  from which  the Scheduled  Castes and  the Scheduled Tribes  suffered. A  Constitution, Bench  of  this Court reiterated the above principle in Janki Prasad Parimoo & Ors. etc. etc. v. State of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors. in which it was observed at page 252 thus:      (1) [1973] 3 S.C.R. 236. 487      "That accounts  for the raison d ’etre of the principle      explained in  Balaji’s  case  which  pointed  out  that      backward     classes  for   whose  improvement  special      provision was  contemplated by  Article 15(4)  must  be      comparable to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes who      are standing  examples  of  backwardness  socially  and      educationally".      This  view   is  in   conformity  with   the  intention underlying clause  (6) of  the resolution regarding the aims and objects of the Constitution moved by Jawaharlal Nehru on December 13,  1946 which  asked the  Constituent Assembly to frame  a  Constitution  providing  adequate  safeguards  for minorities, backward  and tribal  areas  and  depressed  and other backward  classes and  also  with  the  provisions  of Article 338  and Article 340 of the Constitution. Unless the above restriction  is imposed  on the  Government, it  would become possible  for the  Government to  call any  caste  or group or  community which  constitutes a  powerful political lobby in the State as backward even though in fact it may be an advanced  caste or group or community but just below some other forward  community. There  is another important reason why such advanced castes or groups or communities should not be included in the list of backward classes and that is that if castes  or groups  and communities  which are fairly well advanced and  castes and  groups and  communities which  are really  backward   being  at   the  rock-bottom   level  are classified together  as backward  classes,  the  benefit  of reservation  would  invariably  be  eaten  up  by  the  more advanced sections  and the  really deserving  sections would practically  go  without  any  benefit  as  more  number  of children  of   the  more   advanced  castes   or  groups  or communities amongst them would have scored higher marks than the  children   of  more   backward  castes   or  groups  or communities. In  that event  the whole object of reservation would become  frustrated. It  is stated  that it  was with a view to avoiding this anomalous situation, the Government of Devaraj Urs  had to  appoint the  Havanur Commission to make recommendations for  the purpose of effectively implementing the objects of Article 15(4) and Article 16(4). Hence as far as possible  while preparing  the list  of backward classes, the State Government has to bear in mind the above principle as a  guiding factor.  The adoption  of the  above principle will not  unduly reduce  the number  of persons  who will be eligible for  the benefits  under Article  15(4) and Article 16(4) of  the Constitution since over the years the level of the Scheduled  Castes and  Scheduled Tribes is also going up by reason of several remedial 488

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 103 of 106  

measure taken  in regard  to them  by the  State and Central Government. At  the same  time, it  will  also  release  the really backward  castes, groups  and  communities  from  the strangle-hold of  many advanced  groups which  have had  the advantage of  reservation along  with  the  really  backward classes for  nearly three  decades. It  is  time  that  more attention is  given to  those castes, and groups communities who have  been at  the lowest  level suffering  from all the disadvantages    and     disabilities    (except     perhaps untouchability) to  which many  of the  Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes  have been  exposed but without the same or similar advantages that flow from being included in the list of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes.      Since economic  condition is also a relevant criterion, it would be appropriate to incorporate a ’means test’ as one of the  tests in determining the backwardness as was done by the Kerala  Government in Jayasree’s case (supra). These two tests namely,  that the  conditions of  caste  or  group  or community should  be more  or less similar to the conditions in which  the  Scheduled  Castes  or  Scheduled  Tribes  are situated and  that the  income of  the family  to which  the candidate belongs  does not exceed the specified limit would serve as useful criteria in determining beneficiaries of any reservation to  be made under Article 15(4). For the purpose of Article  16(4) however,  it should also be shown that the backward  class  in  question  is  in  the  opinion  of  the Government not  adequately  represented  in  the  Government services.      There is one other basis on which a classification made for purposes  of Article  15 (4)  or Article  16 (4)  of the Constitution has  received the  approval of  this  Court  in Chitralekha’s case  (supra). In  that  case  the  Court  was concerned with  a list  of backward  classes prepared on the basis of  economic condition  and occupation.  According  to that Government  order, persons  whose family income was Rs. 1,200 per  annum or less and who were engaged in occupations such as  agriculture.  petty  business,  inferior  services, crafts or  other occupations  involving manual  labour  were treated as belonging to backward classes. The petitioner who had filed  the petition  in the High Court did not challenge the validity of the said classification. But on a submission made on  behalf of the State Government, the Court expressed its general  approval to  the method of classification. Even in the  case before us now, there is a reservation of 15 per cent of  seats of posts in favour of members falling under a classification styled  as ’special  group’ which is based on similar 489 occupation-cum-income considerations.  Even here  no serious objection is  taken by  any party to the said classification treating A  persons who  satisfied the  prescribed tests  as being eligible  for reservation.  It is  apparent that  this ’special group’  is  a  creature  of  social,  economic  and political necessity.  Since a  classification  made  on  the above said basis has received the approval of a Constitution Bench  of   equal  strength   and  its  correctness  is  not challenged before  us, we  treat this  classification  as  a valid  one   even  though   a  criticism  of  this  kind  of classification was made, not unjustifiably as we now see, by the Mysore  High Court  in D.G.  Viswanath’s  case.(1)  This classification would  include persons  of all castes, groups and communities  provided the  two tests  namely, occupation test and income test are satisfied.      Next comes the vexed question relating to the extent of reservation that  can be  made under Art. 15 (4) and Art. 16

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 104 of 106  

(4) of the Constitution. In Balaji’s case (supra) this Court took the  view that  since Article 15 (4) is an exception to Article 15 (1) and Article 16 (4) is an exception to Article 16 (1) and (2) any reservation made under Article 15 (4) and Article 16  (4) should  not exceed  50 per cent of the total number of seats or posts, as the case may be. The Court held that reservation  of 68  per cent  of seats under Article 15 (4) which  was a  special provision  was invalid.  The Court further held  that ’speaking  generally and in a broad way a special ID  provision should  be less  than 50 per cent, how much less  than 50  per cent  would depend upon the relevant prevailing circumstances  in each  case’. This statement was understood by  a Constitution  Bench of  this  Court  in  T. Devadasan v.  The Union  of India and Anr.(2) as laying down the rule that reservation under Article 15 (4) or Article 16 (4) could not be more than 50 per cent of seats or posts. In that case  Mudholkar, J.  speaking for  the majority said at page 698:           "Even if  the  Government  had  provided  for  the      reservation of  posts for Scheduled Castes and Tribes a      cent per  cent reservation of vacancies to be filled in      a particular year or reservation of vacancies in excess      of 50  per cent  would, according  to the  decision  in      Balaji’s case, not be constitutional".      (1) A.I.R. 1964 Mys. 132.       (2) [1964] 4 S.C.R. 680. 490      But in  the State of Kerala and Anr. v. N.M. Thomas and Ors. (supra) the question relating to the permissible extent of reservation  arose for  consideration. Ray,  C.J. came to the conclusion  that taking  into consideration  the  entire Government service,  there was no excessive concession shown to the  employees belonging  to  the  Scheduled  Castes  and Scheduled Tribes.  Beg, J.  (as he then was) was also of the same view. Fazal Ali, J. Observed at page 1005 thus:           "This means  that the reservation should be within      the permissible  limits and  should not  be a  cloak to      fill all  the posts  belonging to a particular class of      citizens  and   thus  violate   Art.  16   (1)  of  the      Constitution indirectly. At the same time clause (4) of      Art. 16  does not  fix any  limit on  the power  of the      Government to  make reservation.  Since clause (4) is a      part of Art. 16 of the Constitution it is manifest that      the State  cannot be  allowed to  indulge in  excessive      reservation so  as to  defeat the  policy contained  in      Art. 16 (1). As to what would be a suitable reservation      within permissible  limits will  depend upon  the facts      and circumstances  of each  case and  no hard  and fast      rule can  be laid  down, nor can this matter be reduced      to a mathematical formula so as to be adhered to in all      cases. Decided  cases of  this Court have no doubt laid      down that  the percentage  of  reservation  should  not      exceed 50 per cent. As I read the authorities, this is,      however, a  rule of  caution and  does not  exhaust all      categories. Suppose  for instance  a State  has a large      number of backward classes of citizens which constitute      80 per  cent of  the population  and the Government, in      order to  give them  proper representation, reserves 80      per cent  of the jobs for them, can it be said that the      percent age  of reservation  is bad  and  violates  the      permissible limits  of clause  (4) of  Art.  16  ?  The      answer  must   necessarily  be  in  the  negative.  The      dominant object  of this  provision is to take steps to      make inadequate representation adequate."      Krishna Iyer, J. in the same case observed at page 981

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 105 of 106  

thus:           "I agree  with my learned brother Fazal Ali, J. in      the view  that the arithmetical limit of 50 per cent in      any one 491      year set  by some  earlier rulings  cannot  perhaps  be      pressed too far. Overall representation in a department      does not  depend on  recruitment in  a particular year,      but the  total strength  of a  cadre. I  agree with his      construction of  Art. 16  (4) and  his view  about  the      ’carry forward’ rule."      After carefully going through all the seven opinions in the above  case, it  is difficult  to held  that the settled view of this Court that the reservation under Article 15 (4) or Article  16 (4)  could not  be more  than 50 per cent has been unsettled by a majority of the Bench which decided this case. I  do not propose to pursue this point further in this case because  if reservation is made only in favour of those backward castes  or classes  which  are  comparable  to  the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, it may not exceed 5() per cent  (including 18  per cent reserved for the Scheduled Castes and  Scheduled Tribes  and 15  per cent  reserved for ’special group’)  in view  of the  total population  of such backward classes  in the  State of  Karnataka.  The  Havanur Commission has  taken the  number of  students passing  at S S.L.C. examination  in  the  year  1972  as  the  basis  for determining  the   backwardness.  The   average  passes  per thousand of  the total  population of the State of Karnataka was 1.69  in 1972.  The average in the case of the Scheduled Castes was  0 56  and in  the case  of Scheduled  Tribes was 0.51. Even if we take all the castes, tribes and communities whose average is below 50 per cent of the State average i.e. below .85  per cent  for classifying them as backward, large chunks of population which are now treated as backward would have to go out of the list of backward classes. Consequently the necessity  for reservation  which would  take the  total reservation under  Article 15  (4) and Article 16 (4) beyond 50 per  cent of  the total number of seats/posts would cases to exist.  The present  arrangement has been worked for more than five  years already. It is now necessary to redetermine the question  of backwardness  of the various castes, tribes and communities  for purposes  of Article 15 (4) and Article 16 (4) in the light of the latest figures to be collected on the various  relevant factors  and to  refix the  extent  of reservation for  backward classes. The reservation of 15 per cent now  made under  Article 15  (4) and Article 16 (4) but which may  be traced  to Article  14 and  Article 16  (1) to ’special group’  based on  occupation-cum-income can  in any event be  availed of  by  members  of  all  communities  and castes.      At this  stage it  should be  made clear  that if  on a fresh determination  some castes  or communities  have to go out of the list of 492 Backward classes  prepared for Article 15 (4) and Article 16 (4),  the   Government  may   still  pursue  the  policy  of amelioration of  weaker sections  of the  population amongst them in accordance with the directive principle contained in Article 46  of the Constitution. There are in all castes and communities poor  people who  if  they  are  given  adequate opportunity and  training may  be able  to  compete  success fully  with   persons  belonging   to  richer   classes  The Government  may   provide  for   them  liberal   grants   of scholarships, free  studentship, free  boarding and  lodging facilities, free  uniforms, free  mid-day meals etc. to make

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 106 of 106  

the life  of poor  students comfortable.  The Government may also provide extra tutorial facilities, stationery and books free of  cost and  library facilities. These and other steps should be  taken in  the lower classes so that by the time a student appears  for the  qualifying examination  he may  be able to attain a high degree of proficiency in his studies.      The State  Government shall  now proceed to redetermine the whole  question  of  reservation  of  seats/posts  under Article 15  (4) and  Article 16  (4) of  the Constitution in this judgment. S.R. 493