Supreme Court Questions Reservation for IAS Officers' Children; Creamy Layer Debate Intensifies

The Supreme Court on Friday questioned whether children of economically and socially advanced families should continue to receive reservation benefits under the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category, particularly when their parents have already benefited from affirmative action and achieved significant professional success. The observations came during a hearing related to the creamy layer principle, a mechanism used to exclude financially advanced individuals within backward classes from reservation benefits.

A bench comprising Justice B V Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan raised concerns about the continuing extension of reservation benefits to children of senior government officials. Justice Nagarathna remarked that if both parents are IAS officers or hold similarly high-ranking government positions, their children may no longer require reservation support. She observed that education, financial stability, and professional advancement naturally lead to social mobility, which is one of the key objectives of the reservation system.

The case before the court involves a candidate from Karnataka belonging to the Kuruba community, which falls under category II(A) of the state’s backward classes list. The candidate had secured selection as an assistant engineer in Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. under the reserved category. However, the District Caste and Income Verification Committee denied him a caste validity certificate after determining that his family belonged to the creamy layer, citing an annual family income of nearly Rs 19.48 lakh.

Also Read: President Murmu Urges IAS Officers To Deliver Fast, Ethical Governance Without Delay

During the proceedings, the petitioner’s counsel argued that salary income should not be the sole factor in deciding creamy layer status for government employees. Advocate Shashank Ratnoo contended that the classification should instead depend on the rank and service category of the parents, such as whether they belong to Group A or Group B services. He argued that considering salary alone could unfairly exclude lower-ranking government employees such as clerks, drivers, and peons from reservation benefits despite their limited social advancement.

The lawyer further submitted that Karnataka government clarifications state salary and allowances of state government employees should not be counted while assessing creamy layer eligibility. He also argued that agricultural income and salary income should be treated differently from business or private income sources. According to the petitioner’s side, treating all forms of income equally would blur the distinction between OBC reservations and reservations granted under the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) category.

The petition challenges a Karnataka High Court division bench ruling that overturned an earlier single-judge decision favoring the candidate. The high court had held that the exemption regarding salary income applied only to reservations under the Union government and not to Karnataka’s reservation framework. Referring to the state’s creamy layer policy, the court concluded that the candidate’s family income exceeded the prescribed limit and therefore disqualified him from availing reservation benefits under the OBC category.

Also Read: CM Dhami Pushes Uttarakhand Forest Fire Control And Monsoon Preparedness Review