THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. versus DAVINDER SINGH & ORS.

THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. versus DAVINDER SINGH & ORS.

Sub-classification of Scheduled Castes for purposes of affirmative action (including reservation) is constitutionally permissible: States may sub-classify only where the class is not homogenous for the object, the classification is based on an intelligible differentia with a reasonable nexus to remedying inadequate representation, is supported by quantifiable empirical data, and does not result in exclusion or variation of entries in the Presidential List under Article 341(2); the creamy-layer principle applies to SC/ST and the State should identify and exclude socially advanced individuals.

Parties
Appellant: State of Punjab & Ors.; Respondent: Davinder Singh & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Constitution Bench Judgment
Outcome
Reference answered: sub-classification of Scheduled Castes for reservation is constitutionally permissible; E.V. Chinnaiah (2005) overruled to the extent it barred sub-classification; States may sub-classify subject to standards and judicial review; creamy-layer principle applies to SC/ST
Legal Topics
Sub Classification of Scheduled Castes, Article 341, Article 16(4), Creamy Layer, Affirmative Action, Presidential List, Judicial Review, Article 335
Constitutional Law Reservation Equality Administrative Law Public Employment Sub Classification of Scheduled Castes Article 341 Article 16(4) +5 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State of Punjab & Ors.

Appellant

Davinder Singh & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Constitution Bench Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sub-classification of a reserved class is permissible under Articles 14, 15 and 16
  2. 2 Whether the Scheduled Castes constitute a homogenous or a heterogenous grouping
  3. 3 Whether Article 341 creates a homogenous class through a deeming fiction

Ratio Decidendi

Sub-classification of Scheduled Castes for purposes of affirmative action (including reservation) is constitutionally permissible: States may sub-classify only where the class is not homogenous for the object, the classification is based on an intelligible differentia with a reasonable nexus to remedying inadequate representation, is supported by quantifiable empirical data, and does not result in exclusion or variation of entries in the Presidential List under Article 341(2); the creamy-layer principle applies to SC/ST and the State should identify and exclude socially advanced individuals.

Court Disposition

Reference answered: sub-classification of Scheduled Castes for reservation is constitutionally permissible; E.V. Chinnaiah (2005) overruled to the extent it barred sub-classification; States may sub-classify subject to standards and judicial review; creamy-layer principle applies to SC/ST

Orders

  • Sub-classification of Scheduled Castes for reservation is constitutionally permissible where intelligible differentia exists and is rationally connected to remedial purpose and supported by empirical data
  • The Five-Judge Bench decision in E.V. Chinnaiah insofar as it held sub-classification impermissible is overruled