Why Dalit Leaders Mayawati, Paswan Oppose Supreme Court Verdict On Sub-Classification In SC, ST Reservation

Dalit leaders Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) supremo Mayawati and Lok Janshakti Party (Ramvilas) [LJP (R)] chief Chirag Paswan have opposed the Supreme Court's decision to allow sub-classification within the Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) reservations.

In its 1 August verdict, a seven-judge bench of the apex court held that sub-classification of SC and ST is permissible to grant separate quotas for more backwards within the SC and ST categories.

In response, Paswan said, "We disagree with the observation of the Supreme Court, and we have registered this disagreement prominently. We are clear about this: that the basis of Scheduled Caste is untouchability."

He added that as the SC reservation does not have an educational or economic basis, there can neither be any creamy layer provision in it nor reservation within reservation will be appropriate among SCs.

Notably, four of the six judges who favoured the sub-classification also stated that the exclusion of the creamy layer from the benefits of affirmative action must be applied.

They urged the state to evolve a policy for identifying the creamy layer from the SC and ST communities so they can be excluded from the benefit of affirmative action.

Mayawati criticised this advice for the absence of a precise definition of 'creamy layer'.

The BSP supremo claimed that the SC/ST communities have faced atrocities as a single group, and hence, sub-classification will neither be right nor as per the fundamentals of the Constitution.

She also pointed out the chaos the Supreme Court order will bring by giving both the Centre and states the power to include or exclude communities in the SC list and the use of this provision by state political parties.

It is well known that a handful of SC/ST communities have been able to corner the maximum reservation benefits meant for them, while many SC/ST caste groups still remain backward, unable to take advantage of reservations.

This sentiment was echoed by former Bihar chief minister Jitan Ram Manjhi, who said, "Four castes have been taking all reservation benefits for 76 years, while castes like Bhuiya, Dom, Mehtar, and Musahar are still backward."

While he did not name the beneficiary castes, reportedly Balmikis and Mazhabi Sikhs in Punjab, Madiga in Andhra Pradesh, Paswans in Bihar, Jatavs in Uttar Pradesh (UP), and Arundhatiyars in Tamil Nadu are known to take maximum reservation benefits.

Notably, Jatavs, who comprise more than half of the Dalit population in UP, form a major chunk of the BSP's vote bank. Similarly, Paswans in Bihar are the major voters of the LJP (R). This explains why Mayawati and Chirag Paswan are concerned.

If sub-classification is implemented, the Jatavs and Paswans will lose the edge they currently enjoy in seeking reservation benefits, while the other backward castes among SCs and STs will get more opportunities.

Thus, Mayawati and Paswan are only echoing the concerns of their vote banks and are not actually concerned about the Dalit community as a whole.

On the contrary, the Chief Justice of India, D Y Chandrachud, wants to ensure that the reservation benefits trickle down to those who need them the most.

However, Mayawati's concerns regarding state political parties using the sub-classification provision for their political advantage and the possible confusion between the Centre and states cannot be ruled out.

But in principle, the Supreme Court is right in acknowledging that the SC/ST community is not necessarily "a uniform and internally homogenous class which cannot be further classified."

Justice B R Gavai, who himself comes from a Dalit background, said, "When the same opportunities are provided to SC communities that are on different footings, it can only mean aggravation of inequality."