Sub-Categorisation of Scheduled Castes | 30 Jan 2024

Source: TH

Why in News?

The Indian government has set up a high-level committee, led by the Cabinet Secretary, to address the issue of dominant Scheduled Caste (SC) communities receiving more benefits than the most backward ones.

• This development comes particularly in response to the Madiga community's demands in Telangana.

What is the Mandate of the Newly Formed Committee?

• The committee's primary objective is to explore alternative methods for addressing grievances faced by various SC communities across the country.
  • While initiated in response to the Madiga community's concerns, the committee's scope extends beyond one community or state.
• It aims to evaluate and work out a method for the equitable distribution of benefits, schemes and initiatives to the most backward communities amongst the over 1,200 Scheduled Castes across the country, that have been crowded out by relatively forward and dominant ones.

What are the Major Aspects Related to Subcategorisation of SC in India?

• About: Subcategorisation refers to the division or classification of a larger category into smaller, more specific subcategories based on certain criteria or characteristics.
  • In the context of SC in India, subcategorisation may involve further classification within the SC group based on factors such as socioeconomic status or historical disadvantages.
• Madiga Community's Struggle: The Madiga community, constituting 50% of SCs in Telangana, has faced challenges in accessing government benefits intended for SCs due to dominance by the Mala community.
  • Despite their substantial population, the Madiga community argued that it has been excluded from SC-related initiatives.
  • They have been struggling since 1994 for the sub-categorisation of SCs and it was this demand that first led to the formation of the Justice P. Ramachandra Raju Commission in 1996 and later a National Commission in 2007.
• Similar Issue Across States: SC communities in various states have reported similar challenges, leading to the formation of commissions by both State and Union governments.
  • States like Punjab, Bihar, and Tamil Nadu attempted sub-categorisation at the state level, but these efforts are currently tied up in legal battles.
• Constitutional Stance:
  • Articles 341 and 342: It grants powers to the President to notify SC and ST lists and to Parliament to create these lists.
    • However, there is no explicit prohibition against sub-categorisation.
• Previous Standpoint of Union Government: The Union government had in 2005 considered legal options for sub-categorisation of SCs.
  • At the time, the erstwhile Attorney General of India had opined that this could be possible but only if there was “unimpeachable evidence to indicate a necessity”.
  • Also, both the National Commissions for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes opposed amending the Constitution at that time.
    • They argued that creating a sub-quota within the existing quota is not enough, emphasising the immediate need to prioritise the allocation of existing schemes and benefits to these communities.

Conclusion

The forthcoming ruling by a seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court, along with the insights from a committee, will guide the path for the subcategorisation of Scheduled Castes. By focusing on pragmatic solutions aligned with legal standards, we can harness the potential benefits of subcategorisation while mitigating associated risks, fostering a society that is inclusive, supportive, responsive and resilient.