Chirag Paswan, the leader of the Lok Janshakti Party (LJP) founded by his father Ram Vilas Paswan, has expressed strong disagreement with the recent Supreme Court verdict permitting sub-classification within the reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Paswan argues that the classification of Scheduled Castes is based on untouchability, and therefore, the concept of creamy layer or reservation within reservation should not apply to this category. He believes that the Supreme Court's observation overlooks the historical basis of untouchability as the primary factor for the reservation.
The LJP leader emphasizes that the issue of untouchability continues to persist in Indian society, with even educated Scheduled Caste individuals facing discrimination based on their caste background. Paswan's objection to the court ruling is rooted in the belief that any sub-classification within Scheduled Castes may dilute the intended purpose of reservations to uplift the marginalized sections of society. He highlights instances of continued caste-based discrimination to illustrate the ongoing relevance of reservation policies in addressing social inequalities.
On August 1, the Supreme Court ruled in a 6:1 decision in favor of allowing sub-classification within Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes to ensure more equitable distribution of reservation benefits. This decision overturned a previous ruling from 2004 that had prohibited state governments from creating sub-categories for reservation purposes. Chief Justice Chandrachud, leading the Constitution bench, emphasized the need for states to base their sub-classification decisions on objective data rather than political considerations to ensure fairness and effectiveness in the implementation of reservation policies. The court's verdict has sparked a debate on the nuances of reservation policies and the historical context that shapes the discourse around caste-based reservations in India.