Mumbai, April 14 (NationPress) The ruling and opposition factions have expressed strong disapproval of the Maharashtra government's choice to prolong the deadline for submitting statements, objections, or opinions concerning the Justice Anant Badar Committee's report on the sub-categorisation of Scheduled Caste reservations until April 30, despite the fact that the report itself remains undisclosed.

The call for the publication of the Justice Anant Manohar Badar Committee report, particularly its quantified data, has emerged as a pivotal issue in Maharashtra's political landscape as the April 30, 2026, deadline looms.

A single-member committee, led by Justice Anant Manohar Badar (Retired Judge, Patna High Court), submitted its findings to the government on March 16, 2026, regarding the sub-categorisation of Scheduled Caste reservations.

This committee was formed following the Supreme Court's ruling on August 1, 2024, which permitted states to pursue sub-classification within Scheduled Caste reservations.

Subsequently, a committee was established under the leadership of the Chief Secretary through a Government Resolution dated April 10, 2026, to solicit objections, opinions, and statements on this report and to conduct hearings.

The initial deadline for stakeholders to express their opinions and objections via email was April 15, 2026.

Former social justice minister and current NCP MLA Rajkumar Badole has been a vocal advocate, arguing that seeking public input without disclosing the report is nonsensical.

He asserts that the community cannot submit substantial objections without understanding the empirical basis (quantified data) utilized by the committee to justify sub-categorisation.

Prakash Ambedkar, founder of the Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi, criticized the government's timing, insisting on transparency to ensure that sub-categorisation does not serve as a tool for “divide and rule” or “social engineering” lacking a scientific, data-driven foundation.

He cautioned that proceeding without adequate preparation and in haste could lead to widespread dissatisfaction and potential protests.

NCP-SP spokesperson Sunil Mane commented that issuing a Government Resolution and soliciting suggestions and opinions via email suddenly is highly inappropriate when making such a significant decision.

He emphasized that for meaningful suggestions to be made, the policy and the associated report must be publicly accessible. He questioned the basis of the government's decision in the absence of empirical data.

Numerous organizations representing the 59+ Scheduled Castes in Maharashtra have expressed concerns. Their main issue is the 15-year gap since the last census.

They question the origin of the “quantified data” referenced in the report, arguing that without a recent caste census, any data utilized by the Badar Committee could be outdated or speculative. Leaders from the Bahujan Samaj Party (Nagpur Unit), including Aniket Kuttermare, have publicly questioned the government's motives, suggesting that the timing (around Ambedkar Jayanti) and the limited initial feedback period were politically driven rather than genuinely reformative.

Legal experts are demanding that the report be made publicly available to ensure it aligns with the Supreme Court's “creamy layer” and “relative backwardness” criteria. They argue that any decision made based on a “secret report” is likely to be overturned in judicial review.

Both ruling and opposition parties, along with various social organizations, are not only seeking the report’s recommendations but also the empirical data, methodology, and clarification regarding the creamy layer. They want to understand the specific numbers indicating which sub-castes have benefitted most from the 13 percent reservation and those that have been overlooked.

They also seek clarity on how the Badar Committee evaluated representation in government jobs and education without a recent census and how the report defines the “creamy layer” within the Scheduled Caste category.

Social Justice Minister Sanjay Shirsat acknowledged that the initial feedback period was too brief, leading to the extension of the deadline to April 30, even though the complete text of the report remains accessible only to government committees, including the one headed by Chief Secretary Rajesh Agrawal.

He confirmed the extension but did not respond to inquiries about why the report has not been publicly released.

In Maharashtra, neo-Buddhists, primarily from the Mahar community within the Scheduled Castes, have traditionally dominated the discussion around Scheduled Caste politics.

The proposed sub-categorisation is perceived by analysts as an effort to consolidate support among Hindu Scheduled Caste communities and potentially undermine the unity of the Dalit vote bank, especially following the BJP's defeat in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections.

Political analysts further suggest that by advocating for sub-classification, the BJP-led Mahayuti is directly appealing to the Matang community and other smaller Scheduled Caste sub-castes who feel marginalized by the existing system.

This initiative aims to create a “rainbow coalition” of smaller Dalit groups to counterbalance the solid opposition-leaning neo-Buddhist vote.

For the Maha Vikas Aghadi, this is an attempt to regain Dalit support after the 2024 elections, during which a significant segment of the Dalit vote shifted towards it.

(Contact Sanjay Jog at sanjay.j@ians.in)