Can't decide creamy layer solely on basis of income: SC (Rejects Centre's plea against rulings of 3 HCs), Pg11

Key Highlights:

• The Supreme Court ruled that the creamy layer status within Other Backward Classes (OBCs) cannot be determined solely based on parental income.
• The ruling affirmed judgments from the High Courts of Madras, Kerala, and Delhi regarding OBC (Non-Creamy Layer) eligibility for Civil Services Examinations.
• The court dismissed the Centre’s appeals against the High Court judgments, emphasizing that treating employees of private entities and Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) differently from government employees is discriminatory.

Detailed Insights:

• The ruling addresses the Office Memorandum (OM) of September 8, 1993, which specifies criteria for identifying the creamy layer among OBCs, and a subsequent clarificatory letter from October 14, 2004.
• The court clarified that while the 1993 OM excluded salary and agricultural income from the income/wealth test, the 2004 letter directed inclusion of salary income of PSU and private sector employees, leading to discrimination.
• The Supreme Court emphasized that determining creamy layer status should consider the category and status of the post held by the parents, not just income, to avoid artificial distinctions within the same social class.
• The judgment reinforces the principle that excluding individuals from reservation benefits solely based on salary, without considering their posts, violates Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution, which uphold the equality doctrine.

Key Concepts Involved:

• Creamy Layer: Refers to the socially and economically advanced members within OBCs who are not eligible for reservation benefits.
• Other Backward Classes (OBCs): A collective term used by the Government of India to classify castes which are educationally or socially disadvantaged.
• Office Memorandum (OM): An official communication used by the government to convey decisions and policies.