The "creamy layer" concept is a pivotal part of India's affirmative action landscape, designed to ensure that reservations in education and employment benefit the most disadvantaged within the Other Backward Classes (OBCs).This blog focuses on the evolution of the concept of the "creamy layer" as a part of the framework of the OBC reservations, the 2024 ruling on the same, and the effect of this judgment on the reservation policy and social equity in India

The Indian Creamy Layer Concept's History

The concept of the "creamy layer" originated in India with the aim of making sure that the most disadvantaged sections of society which included, the Other Backward Classes (OBCs), get benefit from affirmative action and reservations. This term was first used in the Supreme Court case between State of Kerala and NM Thomas in 1976. Justice Krishna Iyer warned that if any rich person belonging to backward caste obtained such benefits exclusively it would defeat the very purpose such a policy intends to support those who truly belong to these communities but were less fortunate.

The decade of 1990: Basis of Creamy Layer Theory

During the 1990s, there was significant progress made on the idea behind creamy layer in India. Mandal Commission's report recommended that other backward classes (OBCs) should be should be provided with reservations in jobs and educational institutions to improve their social and educational status .But the government was required by the Court to keep the "creamy layer" out of these advantages.

Supreme Court held that creamy layer shall comprise of such OBC members who have achieved significant social status and cannot, therefore, be given the benefit of reservation on the ground that they fall under the parameters of being backward. The judgement seeks to achieve the result that the most vulnerable in these communities are not left at the mercy of seeing a select few among their ranks becoming wealthy from the benefits of a trust. That is consistent with the constitutional imperative to promote justice and equality for all citizens, particularly those who have been victims of unfair discrimination in the past.

The government and the courts tried to improve the standards for determining which OBC category member belonged to the creamy layer in the ensuing decades. A number of Office Memoranda were released by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions to offer recommendations for figuring out the creamy layer, taking into account things like property ownership, government service, and income.

The interpretation and use of the creamy layer principle were significantly influenced by the Supreme Court. In the case of Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India (2008), the Court upheld the exclusion of the creamy layer and directed the government to periodically reassess income thresholds that are used to determine creamy layer.

Current Events: The 2024 verdict

On 1 August, 2024, the Supreme Court rendered a historic ruling, maintaining the condition that the creamy layer be kept outside of Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) in order to be eligible for reservation rights.

This judgment was a component of a larger one that permitted states to divide SCs and STs into smaller groups according to how backward they are. Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud led a seven-judge panel that emphasized the need to exclude the creamy layer in order to achieve true equality as defined by the Constitution.

The Court's decision permits governments to divide up SCs and STs into smaller groups, allowing for a more precise distribution of reserve benefits. This judgment was a component of a larger one that permitted states to divide SCs and STs into smaller groups according to how backward they are. Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud led a seven-judge panel that emphasized the need to exclude the creamy layer in order to achieve true equality as defined by the Constitution.

A more sophisticated distribution of reservation benefits is made possible by the Court's decision, which permits governments to establish subcategories within SCs and STs. Supreme Court held that creamy layer shall comprise of such OBC members who have achieved significant social status and cannot, therefore, be given the benefit of reservation on the ground that they fall under the parameters of being backward. Supreme Court also laid down that social status has to be considered along with economic criterion in determining as to who would form the creamy layer. After this judgement, Creamy Layer has become an integral part of the reservation system in India.

Justice Bela Trivedi dissented, claiming that the Presidential List-which defines SCs-should not be changed and against subclassification within SCs. She stressed that because SCs are a homogeneous class, they shouldn't be separated for the purposes of affirmative action.
Implications of the judgement:

1. Effect on Policies Regarding Reservations: The ruling might force a review of the current reservation regulations, especially as they apply to SCs and STs. With the introduction of the creamy layer concept, the government could have to set precise standards for determining who is wealthy and who is not in these neighbourhoods. To make sure that people who are actually disadvantaged receive reservation advantages, this may entail carrying out empirical research and evaluations.
    
2. Justice and Social Equity: The goal of removing the creamy layer is to advance social justice in SCs and STs. The judgement seeks to achieve the result that the most vulnerable in these communities are not left at the mercy of seeing a select few among their ranks becoming wealthy from the benefits of a trust. That is consistent with the constitutional imperative to promote justice and equality for all citizens, particularly those who have been victims of unfair discrimination in the past.
    
3. Implications for Politics: Given that it could alter the nature of caste-based politics in India, the decision is probably going to have a big political impact. Political parties that depend on the endorsement of SCs and STs might have to reconsider their approaches in view of the revised reservation requirements. The ruling may also result in more calls for subclassification and the development of particular standards for different groups falling under the SC and ST classifications.
    
4. Implementation challenges: There are various obstacles associated with implementing the creamy layer principle inside Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) that need to be carefully considered. Strong structures are required to identify and keep the wealthier members of these communities from receiving reservation benefits, as demonstrated by the recent Supreme Court decision that extended the creamy layer concept to SCs and STs. Here are some of the main obstacles to putting this theory into practice as well as some unusual viewpoints.
    
5. Affirmative Action's Future: Important concerns concerning the future of affirmative action in India are brought up by the ruling. The creamy layer approach is meant to make reservations more successful, but it also makes social fairness more difficult to achieve. Reforming policies and continuing the conversation are necessary to strike a balance between the necessity of historical injustices and meritocracy.

Conclusion
The concept of the creamy layer's development, in fact, is a great solace for ensuring that the reservations are well-targeted towards those really in need. If this philosophy is sincerely implemented among the OBC, SC, and ST bookings, no question of the benefits of reservations reaching those who need them most will arise.

The recent adherence to creamy layer excision from SCs and STs sends a clear message about the country's commitment to true equality, and demands further policy improvement and strong implementation mechanisms. Since India is working towards the equilibrium between social justice and meritocracy, the creamy layer concept will be a major barrier for shifting to a fairer world.