Introduction

The Union government of India has taken a significant step by forming a committee of Secretaries to address the pressing issue of equitable distribution of benefits, schemes, and initiatives among the diverse Scheduled Castes (SCs) spread across the nation.
This move has been triggered by a longstanding demand for sub-categorization of SCs, particularly raised by the Madiga community in Telangana.

Need for Sub-Categorization

Historical Imbalance: Over 1,200 Scheduled Castes exist in India, leading to varying degrees of backwardness and underrepresentation.
Demand from Madiga Community: The Madiga community in Telangana has been vocal about sub-categorization to ensure fair allocation of benefits.
Prime Minister’s Commitment: Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s pledge to address this issue gained prominence during the Telangana Assembly election.

Constitutional Challenge: A seven-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court is set to examine the permissibility of sub-categorization among SCs and Scheduled Tribes.
Focus on Reservation: The Supreme Court’s hearing revolves around the constitutionality of sub-categorization concerning reservation in jobs and education, leaving other aspects open for consideration.

State-Level Attempts: In the past two decades, several states, including Punjab, Bihar, and Tamil Nadu, have attempted to introduce reservation laws for sub-categorizing SCs within their jurisdictions. However, these efforts have been entangled in legal battles, awaiting a decision from a Supreme Court Constitution Bench.
Andhra Pradesh’s Initiative: The issue gained prominence when the Andhra Pradesh government established a commission in 1996, led by Justice Ramachandra Raju, to recommend sub-categorization based on disparities among SC communities. In 2004, the Supreme Court ruled that states lacked unilateral authority to sub-categorize communities within the SC and Scheduled Tribes (ST) lists, as this prerogative rested with Parliament and the President.
Contradictory Rulings: A 2020 judgment by a five-judge Bench, led by Justice Arun Mishra, contradicted the 2004 ruling by suggesting that determining benefits within the SC/ST lists would not constitute “tinkering” and could be within the purview of states. This contradiction led to the referral of the 2020 judgment to a larger Bench.

Equitable Strategies: The committee, chaired by the Cabinet Secretary, aims to explore alternative approaches to address grievances within the SC communities.
No Involvement in Reservation: The committee is explicitly instructed not to interfere with reservation-related matters, such as quota distribution for employment and education.
Focus on Special Initiatives: Instead, it will concentrate on strategies like special initiatives and the realignment of existing schemes to benefit underprivileged SCs.
Committee Members: The committee comprises Secretaries from the Home Ministry, Law Ministry, Tribal Affairs Ministry, and Social Justice Ministry.
Submission of Findings: Although no specific deadline is set, the committee is urged to present its findings as soon as possible.

Long-standing Demand: The Madiga community has advocated for sub-categorization since 1994, initiating the formation of commissions to explore possibilities.
Concerns of Exclusion: Madigas allege that the benefits meant for SCs have predominantly favored the Mala community, leaving them marginalized.
State Initiatives: Several states, including Punjab, Bihar, and Tamil Nadu, have attempted state-level reservation laws to sub-categorize SCs.
Pending Supreme Court Decision: These efforts are stalled, awaiting the Supreme Court’s verdict on the matter.

Addressing Graded Inequalities: Advocates argue that sub-categorization rectifies the graded inequalities within SC communities. It ensures that the most backward communities receive their due share of benefits, preventing the dominance of relatively advanced communities.
Representation at All Levels: The goal is to ensure representation at all levels, including higher positions. However, the most marginalized SCs lag so far behind that even reserved positions at advanced levels may not benefit them due to a lack of suitable candidates.

Emphasis on Robust Data: Legal experts stress the significance of comprehensive data, including population figures, socio-economic indicators, and community-specific information.
Basis for Fair Categorization: This data serves as the foundation for reasonable categorization, quota allocation, and informed policy decisions.

The initiative to address sub-categorization within the Scheduled Castes is a critical step towards achieving equitable distribution of benefits and opportunities.
While the Supreme Court grapples with the constitutional aspects of reservation, the government committee seeks alternative means to ensure the welfare of the most marginalized SCs.