The Union government has filed a counter affidavit before the Supreme Court opposing a plea that seeks implementation of the 'creamy layer' principle within reservations for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs), arguing that such a policy shift cannot be mandated through judicial intervention and must be grounded in a thorough empirical study. The affidavit was submitted by the Union Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment on 6 August.

The Government's Core Position

The Centre contended that the writ petition is legally untenable because it essentially seeks a mandamus — a court direction compelling the executive to frame policy in a specific manner — which, it argued, falls outside the domain of judicial review. 'The present writ petition is not maintainable in law as it essentially prays for issuance of a mandamus to the executive to frame policy in a particular manner, which is beyond the judicial domain,' the affidavit stated.

The government further maintained that the basis for identifying SCs, STs, and Other Backward Classes (OBCs) is rooted in historical, social, and educational disadvantage — not economic status alone. It stressed that discrimination against these communities 'does not happen on the basis of economic conditions' and that reservation is designed to address entrenched historical marginalisation, not merely income inequality.

On Existing Precedent and the Creamy Layer

Citing the landmark Indra Sawhney Constitution Bench ruling, the Centre pointed out that the creamy layer principle was expressly confined to OBCs and that the judgment itself observed the discussion had 'no relevance' in the case of SCs and STs. Subsequent Supreme Court decisions, the affidavit argued, have consistently upheld this distinction.

The government drew a clear line between welfare and development schemes — where a means test already applies to ensure benefits reach the most deserving — and reservations in educational institutions and public employment, which it said 'stand on a different footing.'

On Judicial Limits in Policy Matters

Relying on a series of apex court precedents, the Centre argued that courts cannot direct the executive to frame policy in a particular manner unless that policy violates constitutional or statutory rights. The affidavit quoted from an earlier Supreme Court judgment: 'It is not in the domain of the courts to embark upon an inquiry as to whether a particular public policy is wise and acceptable or whether better policy could be evolved.'

Any proposal to introduce income-based preferences within reserved categories, the Centre submitted, must follow 'a holistic review and thorough empirical study, including socio-economic data of reserved category beneficiaries.' Calling the petition 'devoid of merit,' the government urged the court to dismiss it, noting that it neither demonstrates infringement of any fundamental right nor discloses grounds for a writ under Article 32 of the Constitution.

Background: What Triggered the Plea

The Supreme Court had earlier issued notice to the Centre and all state governments on a public interest litigation seeking creamy layer implementation for SCs and STs. The petitions argued that socially and economically advanced families within these communities continue to corner reservation benefits across generations, depriving the weakest sections of affirmative action.

The petitions drew heavily on the Constitution Bench ruling in State of Punjab vs. Davinder Singh, delivered on 1 August 2024, in which a majority of judges favoured application of the creamy layer principle while permitting sub-classification within Scheduled Castes. Shortly after that verdict, however, the Union government publicly maintained that the Constitution does not provide for a creamy layer within SC/ST reservations — a position it has now formally reiterated before the court.

What Happens Next

The matter is now before the Supreme Court, which will consider the government's counter affidavit alongside the petitioners' arguments. The outcome could have far-reaching implications for how affirmative action is structured for SCs and STs across education and public employment in India.