Case Note & Summary
The case involved the identification of the 'creamy layer' among the Backward Classes in Kerala and the implementation of the Supreme Court's directions from the earlier judgment in Indira Sawhney v. Union of India. The State of Kerala had delayed the implementation of these directions, leading to contempt proceedings against its Chief Secretary. Subsequently, the Kerala Legislature enacted the Kerala State Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments or Posts in the Services) Act, 1995, which was challenged for being unconstitutional. The Supreme Court examined the validity of this Act, particularly its provisions regarding the creamy layer. The Court reiterated that the creamy layer must be excluded from the benefits of reservation to ensure that only the truly backward classes benefit from such provisions. The Court found that the Act did not comply with the constitutional mandate and was thus unconstitutional. The Court directed the State to take necessary actions to identify and exclude the creamy layer, emphasizing that legislative validation cannot override judicial principles established in previous rulings. The decision underscored the importance of maintaining equality and preventing discrimination in the reservation system.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Reservation and Creamy Layer - Exclusion of Creamy Layer - Articles 14, 16 of the Constitution of India - The Court held that the creamy layer must be excluded from the backward classes to ensure that the benefits of reservation reach the truly backward classes, as inclusion of the creamy layer would violate the principles of equality and non-discrimination. The Kerala Act 16/95 was found to be unconstitutional for failing to exclude the creamy layer (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the provisions of the Kerala State Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments or Posts in the Services) Act, 1995 are unconstitutional and violate Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court held that the Kerala State Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments or Posts in the Services) Act, 1995 was unconstitutional for failing to exclude the creamy layer from the benefits of reservation, thereby violating Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The Court directed the State to take necessary actions to identify and exclude the creamy layer.
Law Points
- Constitutional validity
- creamy layer
- reservation
- Articles 14
- 16
- legislative action
- judicial review
- discrimination
