SC/ST reservations and sub-classification: Verdict will not be reviewed

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court will not review its August 1 historic verdict allowing reservations and sub-classification of SC/STs. A constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dy Chandrachud held that there was nothing wrong with the verdict. The demand for an open court hearing was also not accepted. A bunch of review petitions were considered in the judge's chamber and dismissed.

In its August 1 verdict, when Chief Justice Chandrachud and Justices BR Gavai, Vikram Nath, Pankaj Mittal, Manoj Mishra and Satish Chandra Sharma of the seven-judge bench took a stand that there should be reservations and sub-classification, Justice Bela M Trivedi was the only one who disagreed. The judges are sticking to that position. The majority verdict also made it clear that the states have the power to include sub-categories of scheduled castes in the list of reservations. It was also reminded that it is the responsibility of the states to give priority to those who are extremely backward.

Four of the six who wrote the verdict that reservation should be granted to sub-categories were of the opinion that the creamy layer should be applied to SC/ST categories. Judge BR Gavai, who belongs to the Scheduled Castes, observed that only then can the true equality envisaged in the Constitution be achieved. This stand of the judges, which had sparked massive protests, was also questioned in the review petitions. The review petition had said that it was an error to interpret the Indira Sawhney judgement on OBC reservation in relation to the issue of sub-categories of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes and that it was not the states but the President and Parliament who had the power to include sub-categories of scheduled castes in the list of reservations.