Abstract

This article delves into the issues surrounding the subservience of India's Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) and the use of the creamy layer theory in affirmative action laws. It examines court decisions and constitutional changes that have influenced the conversation, highlighting the conflicts between affirmative action and the pursuit of equality among marginalized people. The Chinnaiah rule, for instance, is discussed, arguing that it ignored empirical data and social realities that justify sub-classification. The article also examines the policy discussions and legal implications of the creamy layer idea, emphasizing its importance in ensuring that benefits from reservations go to individuals who are truly underprivileged in terms of education and social status. The Indra Sawhney Judgement and rulings have also been discussed, highlighting the need for sub-categorisation to account for the different social and economic deprivation levels in these groups. The 102nd Constitutional Amendment, which granted equal treatment to SCs, STs, and OBCs, is also examined, emphasizing the need for streamlining reservation regulations to maintain consistency and prevent monopolization by members who benefit from reservations. The article advocates for a comprehensive strategy to address the disparities between SCs and STs, including ongoing verification of reservation beneficiary lists, a deadline for reservation measures, and educational programs to promote equality and dignity.

Keywords