Former Chief Justice of India Justice B.R. Gavai revealed on Saturday that he faced sharp criticism from within the Scheduled Caste community for his landmark Supreme Court judgement extending the ‘creamy layer’ exclusion principle to SC reservations. Speaking at a lecture titled ‘Role of Affirmative Action in Promoting Equal Opportunity’ at Mumbai University, the recently retired judge said he was accused of benefiting from reservation himself before advocating the exclusion of economically advanced members of the same community.

Justice Gavai, who served as only the second Dalit Chief Justice of India from May to November 2025, clarified that constitutional posts such as High Court and Supreme Court judges carry no reservation. He pointed out that several Scheduled Caste individuals have risen to top positions such as chief secretary, director general of police, ambassador, and high commissioner. “Can applying the same yardstick to the son of a chief justice or chief secretary and the son of a labourer who studied in a gram panchayat school satisfy the test of equality enshrined in the Constitution?” he asked.

Drawing on Dr B.R. Ambedkar’s vision of affirmative action on the eve of the architect of the Constitution’s 69th death anniversary, Justice Gavai likened reservation to providing a cycle to someone starting ten kilometres behind in a race. Once the disadvantaged person reaches the same point as others, he said, the cycle is no longer required, and both should walk together. The former CJI argued that the creamy layer principle aligns with this original intent of temporary and targeted support rather than perpetual benefit irrespective of economic advancement.

Also Read: Inside the Tragedy at Goa’s Birch By Romeo Lane Nightclub: How a Fire Claimed 25 Lives

The Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling, authored by Justice Gavai in a seven-judge bench, held that states are constitutionally empowered to sub-classify Scheduled Castes and exclude the creamy layer from quota benefits within the SC category. The judgement triggered widespread debate, with critics from within the community accusing the court of diluting hard-won constitutional protections, while supporters hailed it as a step toward genuine equality. Justice Gavai’s candid remarks underscore the personal and ideological tensions surrounding one of the most significant reservation-related verdicts in recent decades.

Also Read: Pakistan-Afghanistan Border Clashes Claims Lives of Four Civilians and Soldier Amid Renewed Tensions