How did the SC read the OBC creamy layer test?, Pg12

Key Highlights:

• The Supreme Court ruled on March 11 that parental income alone cannot determine the creamy layer status for OBC candidates.
• The ruling addresses confusion in applying the income/wealth test for OBC candidates whose parents work in PSUs or private sectors.
• The court highlighted that salary and agricultural income should be excluded when applying the income/wealth test, as per the 1993 DoPT OM.
• The judgment applies to children of parents in PSUs and private employment, potentially benefiting candidates since 2015.

Detailed Insights:

• The concept of creamy layer was introduced after the 1992 Indra Sawhney case to exclude privileged OBC candidates from reservation benefits.
• A 1993 DoPT OM specified categories for exclusion, including children of high-ranking officials and those meeting an income/wealth test.
• The income/wealth test initially set a limit of ₹1 lakh in 1993, revised to ₹8 lakh in 2017, excluding income from salary and agricultural land.
• A 2004 DoPT letter caused confusion by suggesting inclusion of salary income, leading to the Supreme Court's intervention.
• The court found "hostile discrimination" in treating children of PSU and private employees differently from those in government service.
• The ruling mandates fair creamy layer evaluation for OBC candidates from PSU families, pending equivalence establishment.
• The government may need to create supernumerary posts to accommodate candidates who were wrongly denied OBC benefits.

Key Concepts Involved:

• Creamy Layer: A category within OBCs excluded from reservation benefits due to socioeconomic advancement.
• Office Memorandum (OM): Official communication used by government departments to convey decisions and guidelines.
• Other Backward Classes (OBC): A group of castes recognized by the Indian government as socially and educationally disadvantaged.