SC/ST Constitutionally backward, inadequacy can be ground for quota in promotion: SC

Factors like inadequate representation of scheduled castes and tribes in government jobs, instead of their backwardness, need to be considered while granting quota to them in promotions, the Supreme Court said today.

It also observed that the members of SC/ST communities were constitutionally presumed to be backward.

The observations came from a five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, which reserved its verdict on a clutch of petitions seeking reconsideration by a seven-judge bench its 2006 verdict in the M Nagraj case which had put conditions for granting quota benefits in job promotions to employees belonging to the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) communities.

The 2006 verdict had said the states were bound to provide quantifiable data on the backwardness of SCs and STs, the facts about their inadequate representation in government jobs and the overall administrative efficiency before providing quota in promotions to SC/ST employees.

The Centre and various state governments have sought reconsideration of this verdict, saying it has virtually made grant of quota in promotions for SC/ST unworkable. They had also assailed it on various grounds, including that the members of the SC/ST communities are presumed to be backward and the stigma of caste remains with them.

"There is a distinction between other weaker sections and the SCs and STs. The test of backwardness is for those weaker sections who are not SC/ST. So far as SC/ST are concerned, they are constitutionally backward," the bench, also comprising Justices Kurian Joseph, R F Nariman, S K Kaul and Indu Malhotra, said.

It also said "the concept of backwardness is not of much value" so far as SCs and STs are concerned, adding that the 2006 judgement had referred to the importance of quantifiable data on inadequate representation of the SCs/STs in government jobs.

The observation came when senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi opposed the grant of quota in promotions in higher posts, saying "crutches are not forever and crutches are not for all. Generations (of SC/ST) which were crippled have gone and the generations which crippled them have also gone."
Dwivedi assailed the argument of Attorney General K K Venugopal that the stigma and caste-based discrimination remained for SC/ST and gave the example of BSP supremo Mayawati, a SC member, and said she "sat on the chair and her fellow party men sit on the floor."