Reservation Policy In India - A Critical Study With Reference To The Creamy Layer Principle
Author: LawSphereX
Category: Constitutional & Human Rights
Published:
Updated:
RESERVATION POLICY IN INDIA: A CRITICAL STUDY
WITH REFERENCE TO THE CREAMY LAYER PRINCIPLE
Prachi Panwar, B.A. LL.B. (Hons.), Law College Dehradun, Uttaranchal University, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India Dr. Ramakant Tripathi, Assistant Professor, Law College Dehradun, Uttaranchal University, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India
ABSTRACT
The Indian Constitution's reservation policy, which was drawn from colonial affirmative action measures to promote backward areas and classes like SC, ST, and OBC, was established after independence. Originally intended to promote social fairness, the policy has evolved over time, particularly with the advent of the creamy layer idea, to target the economically affluent individuals who fall under the OBC category. The performance and limitations of the creamy layer are reviewed, and the constitutional, legislative, and common law mechanisms controlling laws pertaining to reservations are critically analyzed in this article. Indra Sawhney and M. Nagaraj are two examples of instances that have significantly altered the legal system.
In these cases, the court established rules for the creamy layer, ruled against the lack of judicial procedures, and demanded that economic, social, and periodic data be collected in order to forgo undesired practices. There is some insight into how efficiency and equity might be addressed in tandem from other comparative studies with the US, South Africa, and Brazil. Although the creamy layer principle ensures equality for all members of a reserve group, the fundamental tenet of affirmative action is challenged for ignoring discrimination based on caste. In order to increase the efficacy of the concept for defining inclusive social justice, the author of this study proposes an extended method based on economic and social dimensions.
Therefore, as the socio-political and economic standing of India's backward classes needs to be improved, the study promotes ongoing examination of the reservation rules. 1 Keywords: Reservation policy, creamy layer principle, social justice, affirmative action, backward classes, Indian Constitution, OBCs, SCs, STs.
1.1
INTRODUCTION
The colonial system served as the foundation for Indian reservation policy, which underwent structural changes following Indian independence. In a case as old as India's, the idea of affirmative action was first proposed during British rule as a way to combat social prejudice by giving a backward class the opportunity to be appointed more fairly to state-sponsored positions. The SCs were the first to benefit from this policy, followed by the STs. However, the reservation policy could only gain constitutional legitimacy once the nation gained independence, at which point the writers of the Indian Constitution recognized the necessity of empowering historically underrepresented tribes.
The goal of the strategy, which was outlined in Sections 15 and 16 of the Indian Constitution, was to give the SC, ST, and OBC groups proportionate representation in parliaments, the workforce, and educational institutions. Because of the Mandal Commission, which brought OBC under the purview of quota, the culture surrounding the policy evolved, particularly in the 1970s and 1980s, sparking intense discussion and legal disputes. In order to guarantee that only the most deserving segments of the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) profit from reservation rules, the creamy layer concept was presented as an improvement on the affirmative action framework. This principle was created in the case of Indra Sawhney v. Union of India2 and further developed in M. R. Narendra v. Union of India3.
Its purpose was to deny reservation benefits to economically successful individuals who belonged to the OBC categories. This aids in stopping those in these communities who believe they may gain from the government by stealing from the underprivileged4. This study's objective is to evaluate India's reservation policy critically, with a focus on the creamy layer principle. Without a question, the reservation policy has had a significant positive influence on social integration between the various segments of the Indian population. But it has also prompted the government to discuss how to apply the policy's results to its various population groups.
In order to preserve the integrity of affirmative action, the creamy layer principle was also implemented to prevent situations in which individuals who are economically more affluent within the group identified by their birth certificate deceive themselves into greater opportunities at the expense of a less fortunate batchmate as a similar group. Therefore, the significance of this research resides in evaluating the degree to which the creamy layer principle has succeeded in achieving its intended goals and the area of dispute that influenced its development.
Therefore, this research will seek to make a small addition to this body of knowledge if it can analyse the processes of implementation as well as the legislative and policy frameworks of the reservation policy. In so doing, the study will address the sociopolitical issues that tend to emerge with the implementation of access and equity goals and aspirations. The key questions guiding this research are: What has been the effect of the creamy layer principle on the reservation policy of OBCs? But how have the courts themselves interpreted the creamy layer principle in application, and what light does this cast on social justice? To what extent does one agree with the decision of excluding the creamy layer in relation to constitutional provisions on equality under “Article 14”?
Is it possible that there are loopholes or lacunas in the legislation and policies that require it to be plugged with a view to giving a correct operation to the creamy layer principle? Through these questions, the proposed study seeks to gain an appreciation of the nature, development, and present state of the reservation policy, the impact of the creamy layer principle, and provide suggestions for future legal and policy changes. 1. 2
CONSTITUTIONAL
AND
LEGAL
FRAMEWORK
OF
RESERVATION
POLICY
The Indian Constitution's provisions regarding the country's reservation policy are predicated on the idea of social justice and equity for the underprivileged segments of society. Articles 15(4), 16(4), 46, and 341-342 of the Indian Constitution are the fundamental provisions that form the basis of the reservation policy. The state may take special actions to further the social and educational advancement of any class or individual, as well as for SCs and STs, according to the authority granted by the constitution's "Article 15(4)" provision. Following the passage of affirmative action, this phrase was incorporated into the First Amendment in 1951 to recognize the need for equality, especially in educational facilities.
The same is true for "Article 16(4)," which establishes reserves for any underrepresented backward class of citizens in state-run services and is a key component of affirmative action in the workplace. Additionally, the reinstatement of "Article 46" entails a duty on the part of the state to support the economic and educational advancement of the weaker groups, especially the SCs and STs, who share a constitutionally mandated commitment to social justice. The recommendation of "Articles 341 and 342" anticipates the formation of the President of India in order to identify SCs and STs, as though these groups were granted legal status for reservations.
Altogether, these provisions set up the constitutional authority of the reservation policy while at the same time enabling certain degrees of discretion given the various needs of different backward classes6.
1.2.1 Landmark Judgments Shaping the Reservation Policy
The development and procedure of the reservation policy in India have consistently complied with the Supreme Court's numerous orders under the amendment acts' constitutional provisions. In articulating the fundamental ideas of the reservation mechanisms, these directives have established both general guidelines and legal precedents. The Supreme Court added the qualification of a "reasonable limit" to the benefits accruing under Article 15(4) in M. R. Balaji v. State of Mysore7, emphasizing that reserves set under Article 15(4) cannot be completely arbitrary; rather, they must be reasonable and shouldn't exceed 50%. The court also pointed out that the relativism principle must be applied in order to examine social and educational backwardness. Furthermore, it noted that the only way to identify socially and educationally inferior classes should be by caste.
This was a noteworthy development in the reservation jurisprudence since it established that the equality clause in Article 14 of the Constitution is not violated by merely following affirmative action procedures. The Mandal Commission case, also known as Indra Sawhney v. Union of India8, expands on the ideas presented in M. R. Balaji v. State of Mysore9. The constitutionality of extending reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) under Article 16(4) was upheld by the Supreme Court. The Court also created the idea of the "creamy layer" to deny reservation benefits to the wealthier OBC sectors. The Court acknowledged that the 50% reservation cap acts as a check to avoid glaring differences and affirmed it.
This ruling, which emphasized that quotas must go to the economically and socially disadvantaged rather than the upper class among the lower castes, is unquestionably a major decision in the field of reservation jurisprudence. Additionally, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional provisions of the reservation for the advancement of the lower castes, including the SCs and STs, in M. Nagaraj v. Union of India10. The Court further stated that the only grounds for the aforementioned objections are backwardness and insufficient representation in promotions that adhere to substantive equality and social justice standards. The Court also emphasized the dangers of utilizing reservations indefinitely, asking states to provide statistics to support their ongoing requirement for them.
1.2.2 Statutory Framework
In India, the Act of Reservation is outlined in various acts that control governmental, educational, and employment institutions. The Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006, provides statutory support for the affirmative action program in higher education standards by establishing provisions for SC, ST, and OBC central educational institutions. With the formulation of constitutional principles, the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation in Posts and Services) Act grants SC/STs the legal right to be appointed to government ministries, departments, and PSUs. Furthermore, the "Constitution (Seventy-Third and Seventy-Fourth Amendment) Acts, 1992" provides for reservations in local self-governments such as panchayats and municipalities to enable women, SCs, and STs to participate in politics at the grassroots level.
By creating a statutory law in line with constitutional legislation, these legislative acts illustrate the Indian state's overall attitude toward affirmative action to eliminate social inequality and establish social justice. However, the implementation of these laws still sparks successive legal opinions and policy discussions about identifying legitimate beneficiaries on the one hand and excluding the creamy layer from the benefits of these laws on the other, highlighting the ongoing need to establish ingrained social justices11. 1. 3
THE CONCEPT OF THE CREAMY LAYER: ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION
The creamy layer concept was proposed in an attempt to change India's reservation laws so that only the most severely needy members of the backward classes—particularly the OBCs—would receive aid. OBC members, who belong to a socially and educationally backward class, have been referred to as the "creamy layer" since they can afford to be included in this caste, so they do not suffer as much as the other members of this caste. The goal of delivering social justice was, in fact, for the poor and oppressed in order to combat prejudice and the monopolies that resulted from the reservation policy favoring upper castes within the backward classes. The idea was initially clarified in the landmark ruling of M. R. Balaji v. State of Mysore12, which was later expanded upon in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India13Although race is acknowledged as a factor, the U. S.
Supreme Court subsequently ruled that the implementation of racial quotas was illegal.
In addition to caste, people's economic status is taken into consideration in the Indian model of caste quotas, which is thought to be more sophisticated than the American one. In addition to focusing on economic efficiency and social fairness, this model also examines social inequality and compares it to the American model14.
1.3.1 Judicial Developments Shaping the Creamy Layer Principle
Regarding the idea of the creamy layer, the judiciary has taken a strong stand, particularly in establishing fundamental guidelines for its use. Indra Sawhney v. Union of India15, also known as the Mandal Commission case, is the first notable case in this respect. Here, the Indian Supreme Court attempts to express its position on the exclusion of the creamy layer from the lower classes. The Court ruled that although social caste is thought to be innate, an individual who has advanced in the OBC hierarchy cannot be denied economic prosperity. Because reservation policies are intended to combat the backwardness of the disadvantaged, not to foster a sense of superiority among the advanced, the Court came to the conclusion that the creamy layer should not be permitted to benefit from them.
Regarding the creamy layer, this ruling provided guidelines for identifying these groups so that the government might "exclude" them from the lower caste or backward class fold because they are wealthy, educated, or a member of the upper classes, depending on the situation. Subsequent court rulings have now expanded on the basic framework of the creamy layer idea. The Supreme Court underlined in "Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India16" that the creamy layer in the OBC quota in educational institutions is unacceptable and that social fairness must be introduced into society. This was the case because, although the creamy layer exclusion was popular with the group, SCs and STs needed to be given affirmative action without facing discrimination based on their economic background.
1.3.2 Application of the Creamy Layer Principle in Various Sectors
The following subtopics provide specifics on how the creamy layer principle has affected different sectors: Work. Actually, the efforts are focused on ensuring that the economically more privileged segments of OBCs cannot monopolize the space in the reserved government employment within the framework of the creamy layer principle that is used in the public sphere. The DoPT guidelines have established a cutoff threshold for the OBC's exclusion from the reservation policy's advantages based on several parameters related to the creamy layer, specifically the income and position of parents. In order to maintain the applicability of this idea, these criteria are periodically modified in accordance with economic swings. The OBCs' base of support for higher education has grown as a result of the creamy layer's exclusion from the education sector.
These OBCs are the economically disadvantaged segments of society. The "creamy layer" principle is also emphasized by the "Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006," which states that students who truly belong to Scheduled castes, Scheduled tribes, or other backward classes and are denied access to educational resources because of their financial hardship should be given preference. The goal of the policy, excluding the creamy layer, is to give everyone equitable access to education by removing favoritism toward certain groups of people over others, particularly those who are economically disadvantaged. Since several states have attempted to implement or reject the criterion based on their sociopolitical origins, the application of the creamy layer principle for promotions has remained more debatable than the promotions themselves. In Jarnail Singh v.
Lachhmi Narain Gupta17The Supreme Court once more sought to reinterpret the Creaming layer principle in relation to promotions for OBC classes in order to explain the goal of excluding those forward-powerful OBCs from reservation provisions. Therefore, states cannot use reserves as a way to evade gathering data about inadequate representation for groups eligible for reservations.
Here is a straightforward explanation of the creamy layer's tenets in relation to the goal of giving members of the OBC backwoods promoting opportunities while keeping the wealthy members of the backward class out of all of this18. 1.4
CHALLENGES AND ISSUES RELATED TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
THE CREAMY LAYER PRINCIPLE
This article investigates the social and economic ramifications of implementing the creamy layer principle in India's reservation policy. The true backward classes profit when OBCs are reserved exclusively for economically disadvantaged groups while economically advanced groups are denied affirmative action. This planning approach, however, has also been charged with fostering social division according to economic status, which exacerbates the social marginalization of the impacted communities. Because caste still dictates exclusion, people in these communities do not leave their lower socioeconomic level in search of a new one. Even if the creamy layer principle aims to preserve equality among the groups, people from upper castes occasionally lose their successful worldly identities, yet they still deal with caste-related issues in society.
It is difficult to draw clear and rigid boundaries between people based on economy-oriented norms because of the dynamics of Indian social systems. This calls into question the wisdom of utilizing the ladder of economic emancipation and claiming that those with higher economic status shouldn't be granted reservation benefits. Furthermore, as was previously mentioned, the OBC population varies greatly by area, therefore the permitting of creamy layer criterion could not accurately reflect the group's social and economic circumstances19.
1.4.1 Ambiguities in Defining the Creamy Layer Criteria
The development of the criteria used to determine the creamy layer is another significant issue that has followed the adoption of the creamy layer theory. This method's main tactic has been the submission of proof of income, with the government periodically modifying the income cap to reflect rising expenses and other relevant economic considerations. The contrary strategy, which relied only on income, was denounced by opponents as blatantly ineffective in gauging social deprivation. Two families in the same financial bracket, for example, can be severely marginalized in society because of their caste, educational attainment, and place of residence.
1.4.2 Exclusion of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes from the Creamy Layer
Principle This exclusionary criterion only applies to OBCs; SCs and STs are not covered by the creamy layer notion. This exceptionality stems from the fact that SCs and STs face social discrimination in its more profound form of structural discrimination, as opposed to simple social prejudice that can be lessened by an improvement in economic standing. However, this has now raised questions about the reservation policy's equality and durability. Opponents have voiced concern that SCs and STs have not been included in the definition of the creamy layer, implying a duality in the government's current reservation policy that might allow the wealthier members of these underprivileged groups to continue to benefit from the reserved quota. In Ashoka Kumar Thakur v.
Union of India20, the Supreme Court's consideration of affirmative action in the creamy layer element impacting the SC and (ST) was another case that called into question the constitutional procedure of reservation. The Court accepted the social and historical classification of these groups and deemed the current policy to be fair. The Court pointed out that, while it makes sense that the creamy layer among OBCs shouldn't be included, the extent of social discrimination against SCs and STs differs from that of other communities. Therefore, this differentiation may lead to differently privileged and economically disadvantaged OBCs compared to economically privileged SCs and STs, even though it guarantees OBCs' representation to OBC members in the same manner as SCs and STs.
Regarding intra-group inequalities, Mish Mash on the creamy layer principle is applicable: This raises the question of whether a uniform policy for addressing intragroup disparities across all categories is necessary while still honoring the discriminatory past of each group.
1.4.3 Political Challenges and Resistance to Change
In India, political interventions have affected both the reservation distribution procedures and the application of the creamy layer principle. Due to the numerous reserve politics, opposition programs oppose changes in the reservation policies out of self-interest, which leads to the employment of affirmative action principles to influence political expressions. The changes made and the application of the creamy layer criterion have sparked debates and demonstrations, particularly among some OBC groups who believe that the actions were taken to erode their rights.
Political leaders politicize these issues in an attempt to garner support, which makes it challenging to update or modify the standards to take into account a shifting socio economic landscape. Furthermore, because different states have varied criteria for defining the creamy layer, the issue is made worse by the fact that regional flag bearers do follow different norms regarding reservation regulations and the definition of the aforementioned layer. This circumstance has the consequence of causing the creamy layer concept to vary, which has legal ramifications for how the policy is implemented. The key to the significance of social and economic data is the assessment of political factors in the formulation of reservation policies, which should be justified by law rather than by political expediency.
Though it is easier said than done, the situation in India has now gotten far worse, guaranteeing that anti-caste politics truly serves as a counterbalance to whatever little the reserved castes have benefited from the democratic system. The socioeconomic heterogeneity of the underrepresented groups, methodological challenges with risk definition, the exclusion of SCs and STs, and political resistance to reform are some of the issues surrounding the creamy layer principle that work against equity in the reservation policy, as this paper has shown. In order to comprehend these challenges, a multifaceted approach must be used to articulate them in terms of caste, economics, and exclusion. Additionally, conditions must be established to improve the functioning of affirmative action as a tool for advancing social justice for the underprivileged castes.
1.4.4 Permissibility of Sub-Classification for Equitable Distribution
The Supreme Court of India stepped in to create a subclassification within Scheduled Castes (SC) in State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh21 in order to ensure equitable distribution of the advantages resulting from the reservation program. The case started when the Punjab state government issued a notice order about revisions to the caste census that would subclassify the SC category and provide them the same distributional standards for reservations. The government argued that some of the sub castes included in SCs had not benefited enough from the implementation of the reservation policy and had not been placed similarly, while other sub castes had disproportionately found employment in government positions and educational institutions. The petitioners objected to this subclassification, arguing that it would be incompatible with Article
341 of the Indian Constitution of 1950, which gives the President the authority to designate SCs,
and would violate the constitutional guarantee of equality.
In the aforementioned ruling, the SC affirmed the constitutionality of subcategories within the SC category, holding that states have the authority to establish reasonable subcategories in order to better distribute the advantages of reservation to SCs based on legitimate and objective classification. The Court argues that reservations should help the most underprivileged segment of society deal with its issues. Therefore, it would be the state's responsibility to provide representation if some of the sub castes included in the SC definition are still without it. Because the authority to differentiate within SCs for the privilege of reservation differs from the authority to include or exclude caste from the presidential list, sub-classification does not violate Article 341.
The ruling upheld the rationale behind the reservation policy in order to achieve the corresponding objective of "substantive equality," which suggests that differentiation within SCs based on disadvantage is acceptable as long as its fundamental purpose is related to progressive social justice legislation. 1. 5
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS: RESERVATION POLICIES AND CREAMY
LAYER IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS
Affirmative action laws were introduced in the US as a direct response to color-based discrimination, particularly against African Americans, and they served as the cornerstone of the movement to ensure equality, primarily in the areas of employment and education. In this regard, preferential treatment in America promotes gender, color, and ethnicity, while India's reservation is constitutionally protected and based on socioeconomic backwardness. The creamy layer idea has no explicit parallel in the American system, which does not disregard individuals of development or deny them rewards. Nonetheless, there has been discussion about reverse discrimination, which has resulted in several court cases. The U. S. Supreme Court subsequently ruled in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke22 said that racial quotas were illegal, while race is acknowledged as a factor.
In addition to caste, people's economic status is taken into consideration in the Indian model of caste quotas, which is thought to be more sophisticated than the American one. In addition to aiming for economic efficiency and social justice, this model examines social inequality and compares it to the American model23.
1.5.1 Positive Discrimination in South Africa
Positive discrimination was a strategy used in South Africa's new plan before the new millennium to make up for the prejudice against Black people and other minorities. Employment affirmative action measures are mandated by the Employment Equity Act and the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act of Employment. Similar to how Indian policies do not exclude the so-called "creamy layer" of economically affluent backward castes, South African policies too do not make such distinctions. Rather, they focus on racial proportionality for historically discriminated-against groups at different economic development levels. Therefore, the Indian strategy offers a potential way for the South African government to modify its affirmative action laws to prevent the practice of primarily boosting black elitists in black homes at the expense of the majority of qualified low-income black workers.
However, the conflict in the South African legal system, which is shaped by historical events like apartheid, creates unique social situations that can call for broad reforms to level the playing field.
1.5.2 Other International Practices
Compared to some reservation regulations in India, positive action measures in Europe are less strict and take the shape of targets rather than thresholds. In France and Germany, for instance, laws have been established to guarantee employer-employee interactions without necessarily requiring quotas. This includes catching up with the nation's improved proportionate affirmative action for women and ethnic minorities. The idea of proportional equality, which states that equality being preserved does not ensure a certain outcome, is balanced with the system of reserved slots in the European model. However, like the Indian model, Brazil has implemented more corporate affirmative action measures that are comparable to the reservation system.
1.6 CRITICAL ANALYSIS: PROS AND CONS OF THE CREAMY LAYER
PRINCIPLE
In the framework of the Indian reservation policy, the use of the creamy layer idea was hailed as a progressive way to promote intra-OBC fairness. It aims to end the economically affluent residents of the communities where these recipients come from complaining that the program is undervaluing them. Examining the ruling in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India24 by the Supreme Court of India, this strategy was expanded upon in the State of Karnataka v. Union of India25 case. The Court ruled that favoring one segment of the community over another by the use of a reservation policy within a socially disadvantaged group is unfair. This approach seeks to prevent members of socioeconomically "backward" classes who have still obtained upward social mobility from controlling the few resources available for affirmative action.
The purpose of this exclusion is to fulfill the mandate of "Articles 15(4) and 16(4)" of the Constitution, which safeguard the rights of the economically and socially disadvantaged groups of people. The creamy layer idea helps to create a more equitable distribution of options, which are Berkshire's reservation policy granted to preference givers, by diverting all the benefits to those who do not actually have access to resources and opportunities. The reservation policy is in line with the general equality clause included in "Article 14" of the Constitution since it also avoids the problematic situation of creating an elite group of people among the underprivileged populations.
1.6.1 Criticisms against the principle
The creamy layer principal's actual propensity to subvert well-intentioned social justice principles served as the basis for criticism as well. The majority of critics have disputed the claim that caste discrimination is an economic factor in India, emphasizing that it is a deeply ingrained social problem. Because of their castes, even BSP beneficiaries from the higher classes who own companies and establishments from the illiterate backward castes experience social exclusion and are considered untouchables. As a result, the concept might not adequately account for social disadvantage's multifaceted nature, which encompasses social and cultural factors in addition to solely economic ones.
Exclusion from reservation benefits or possibilities, for example, does not sufficiently reflect the continued genuine social determinate position of creamy layer households, who continue to face material discrimination in social spheres due to caste prejudice. Furthermore, issues with the creamy layer criteria pertaining to the administrations have surfaced in large numbers, causing minimal change in the income standard and the conditions of the majority of provinces, which does not make it universal. The Supreme Court applied the creamy layer notion to promotions in the recent case of Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta26, which begs the question of whether it ought to be applied to other areas of reservation as well. The Court took into consideration that persistent caste biases also have an impact on promotions inside the public sector.
Critics contend that the backward classes, irrespective of their financial standing, may become estranged if the creamy layer is excluded from reservations. They argue that a key societal force in ending caste-based oppression is economic advancement along with the government's dedication to aiding the underprivileged.
1.7 CONCLUSION
An understanding of how a policy intended to provide social justice to the underprivileged classes has evolved over time can be gained by discussing various aspects of Indian reservation policy and the modifications made following the discovery of the "creamy layer" principle. In order for the most disadvantaged members of SC/ST and OBC reservations to receive the fundamental benefits rather than being dominated by the wealthiest members of these groups, affirmative action was given shape by the establishment of the creamy layer inside the caste system. However, the lack of clear criteria, subpar management, and unfavorable reactions from various political and interest groups have all made it impossible to put the creamy layer theory into practice.
Contrary to how different courts have interpreted it, the creamy layer principle has received a lot of attention as society's legislative branch adjusts to different socioeconomic circumstances. The goal of this ongoing improvement is to strive to address these real-world issues and ensure that the thirst reservation strategy fulfills its objectives.
Although it is hoped that this strategy will aid in concentrating attention on the most marginalized in extreme situations, it runs the risk of weakening the definition of social disadvantage, as real-world experience shows that financial standing alone cannot overcome the systemic relationships of caste discrimination. A more comprehensive strategy to reserve gains with features backed by an economic and social framework is required in light of these shifting dynamics. By creating a balance between the economy and society, it would also be in line with the objectives of the constitution.