The Supreme Court declared Tuesday that determining the ‘creamy layer’ from backward classes for the purpose of denying quota benefits in admissions and government jobs cannot be done exclusively on the basis of economic criteria. The Haryana government notification of August 17, 2016 specifying the criteria for creamy layer exclusion within the backward classes was quashed by the Supreme Court, which said it was in flagrant violation of the directions issued by this court in Indra Sawhney-I, also known as the Mandal judgement.
According to the announcement, members of the backward classes with a gross yearly income of up to Rs 3 lakh will be given priority in services and admission to educational institutions. It also stated that the left-out quota would go to residents from backward classes who earn more than Rs. 3 lakh but less than Rs. 6 lakh per year, with those earning more than Rs. 6 lakh per year being classified as creamy layer under state law.
A bench led by Justice L Nageswara Rao struck down the notification, saying that “admissions to educational institutions and appointments to state services based on the notifications… shall not be disturbed.” The court, which included Justice Aniruddha Bose, said that the fact that the notification was issued only on the basis of economic grounds was sufficient reason to throw it out.
Despite the fact that Section 5(2) of the Haryana Backward Classes (Reservation in Services and Admission in Educational Institutions) Act, 2016 mandates that creamy layer identification and exclusion be based on social, economic, and other relevant factors, the state of Haryana has sought to define ‘creamy layer’ from backward classes solely on the basis of economic factors. As a result, we quash the notification…, allowing the State Government to issue a new notification within three months of today, taking into account the principles set forth by this Court in Indra Sawhney-I, as well as the criteria set forth in Section 5(2) of the 2016 Act for determining creamy layer,’ said Justice Rao, who wrote the bench’s decision.
The ruling said that determining the ‘creamy layer’ in the backward classes cannot be done exclusively on the basis of economic criteria, and that social, economic, and other relevant considerations must be considered as well. The criteria for identifying such socially advanced people were not taken into account by the Haryana government when it issued the notification, it claimed.
The ruling came in response to a slew of appeals, including one filed by Pichra Warg Kalyan Mahasabha Haryana, which sought to have two notifications issued by the state government on August 17, 2016 and August 28, 2018 quashed on a variety of grounds, including a violation of the Constitution’s right to equality. Following the famous Mandal decision, the Centre and states were urged to establish a permanent body to deal with the inclusion, under-inclusion, and over-inclusion of groups in lists of other backward individuals.
Following that, the Haryana government issued notifications establishing economic conditions for the exclusion of the creamy layer. The state defined the criterion for estimating yearly income in a notification, stating that it would be based on total annual income, which would include all sources of revenue.
