New Delhi: The Supreme Court, on Friday, set in motion a fresh debate on reservation for the “creamy layer”, by questioning the continued demand for quota benefits by families that have already achieved educational and economic advancement.
The Court questioned the need for reservation for children whose parents are both IAS officers, while hearing a matter concerning reservation benefits for the creamy layer among backward classes.
“If both parents are IAS officers, why seek reservation?” the Court observed, stressing that educational and economic progress leads to social mobility.
“With educational and economic empowerment, there is social mobility. So then again to seek reservation for the children, we will never get out of it. That is a matter we have to concern also,” the bench of Justice B V Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhutan said, as reported by News18.
Several government orders already provide for the exclusion of such advanced sections from reservation benefits, but these exclusions are now being challenged, the Court further noted.
“Social mobility is there. Now there are Government orders excluding all these people, and they are questioning the exclusion. This also has to be kept in mind,” the Court observed.
During the proceedings, the Court questioned the continued demand for reservation benefits by families that have already achieved social and economic advancement through the quota system.
“The parents of students are in good jobs, getting good income, and the children want reservation again. See, they should get out of reservation,” Justice Nagarathna observed.
Once families attain a certain level of educational and economic empowerment through reservation benefits, there must be a reassessment of eligibility for the next generation, the bench remarked.
“There has to be some balance. Socially and educationally backward, yes, but once the parents have attained a level because of taking advantage of reservation…” the Court observed during the hearing.
It also referred to the distinction between reservation for economically weaker sections (EWS) and socially backward communities.
“For EWS there is no social backwardness but only economic backwardness,” Justice Nagarathna said.
The Supreme Court issued notice in the plea and sought responses from the concerned parties.
