CEIRA Act: Sapling of Bitter Fruits of Caste Based Reservations: Part 4

Other Backward Classes

(g)“Other Backward Classes” means the class or classes of citizens who are socially and educationally backward, and are so determined by the Central Government;

Explanation

The National Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993 (NCBC Act’) defines ‘backward classes” to mean such backward classes of citizens other than the SC and ST as may be specified by the Central Government in the lists. [2] A major point of criticism was that the Act did not explicitly exclude the “creamy layer” from the definition of OBCs. The failure to exclude the creamy layer allows the conferment of benefits on undeserving persons.

Supreme Court had held that CEIRA Act can be operative only after excluding the creamy layer from identifiable OBCs. There has to be periodic review of the classes who can be covered by the Statute. The periodicity should be five years. To strike constitutional balance there is need for making provision for suitable percentage for socially and economically backward classes in the 27% fixed.[2]

If the determination of “Other Backward Classes” by the Central Government is with reference to a caste, it shall exclude the “creamy layer” among such caste. [5] But in present scenario, it is not the case of OBC only, creamy-layer shall be imposed on all classes and such periodic review shall be done after every five years. In the era of digital word and AADHAR linking, this task can me made simplified and fast, if political will is motivated to do justice with poor people of all classes.

Scheduled Castes

(h) “Scheduled Castes” means the Scheduled Castes notified under article 341 of the Constitution;

Explanation:

Section 2(h) identifies “Scheduled Castes” by referring directly to the list maintained by the President of India under Article 341. This ensures that the 15% reservation mandated by Section 3(i) of this Act applies only to groups officially recognized by the Union.

While this recent 7-judge bench judgment primarily discussed “sub-classification,” it is highly relevant to how Section 2(h) is applied in Central Institutions. The Court ruled that states by extension, the application of central laws, can sub-classify SCs to ensure that the “more backward” among the Scheduled Castes get the actual benefit. This shifts the interpretation of Section 2(h) from a monolithic block to a more nuanced group where internal merit and degree of backwardness can be considered.[10]

Although such welfare oriented interpretation is done by eminent judiciary, still there are many citizen of SC category living in poor and pitiful conditions. The rich SC person is getting all the benefits, but actual needy is abstained in lack of knowledge of his rights and in absence of periodic assessment of beneficiaries. There is no such law which can mandate this assessment.

Scheduled Tribes

(i) “Scheduled Tribes” means the Scheduled Tribes notified under article 342 of the Constitution;

Explanation:

Section 2(i) identifies Scheduled Tribes (ST) by referencing the list maintained by the President under Article 342. This ensures the 7.5% reservation mandated by Section 3(ii) of this Act applies only to those officially recognized as tribes.

While this case dealt with teacher recruitment, the Constitution Bench clarified a vital principle for Section 2(i) in all educational contexts, reservations for Scheduled Tribes cannot be 100% or lead to the total exclusion of other categories. The Court emphasized that “merit cannot be completely sacrificed,” even when providing for the most marginalized groups defined under Article 342. [11] It is doubtful that this principle is applied in case if reserved seats for SC and OBC are lead to exclusion of other categories, as in present scenario political parties are in competition of giving more and more reservations on the basis of caste identity, making the future generation caste conscious.

Specified North-Eastern Region

¹[(ia) “specified north-eastern region” means the area comprising of the States of Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim, Tripura and the tribal areas of Assam referred to in the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution;

Footnote from Bare Act:

1. Ins. by Act 31 of 2012, s.2 (w.e.f. 19-6-2012).

Explanation

This defines the region as comprising the States of Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim, Tripura, and the tribal areas of Assam specifically known as Sixth Schedule areas. [4]

It is argued that while Section 2(ia) defines the “Specified north-eastern region” broadly including the State of Manipur, the provisos to Section 3, which dictate the actual reservation math, specifically distinguish between “tribal areas referred to in the Sixth Schedule” and the “specified north-eastern region.” Simply being located in a region defined under Section 2(ia) does not automatically subject an institution to the same rules as those in Sixth Schedule tribal areas, unless specifically mentioned in the operational clauses of Section 3. [4]

State Seats

(ib) “State seats”, in relation to a Central Educational Institution, means such seats, if any, out of the annual permitted strength in each branch of study or faculty as are earmarked to be filled from amongst the eligible students of the State in which such institution is situated;]

Explanation:

This defines “State seats” as those seats earmarked from the annual permitted strength to be filled specifically by eligible students of the State where the institution is situated.[4]

Teaching or Instruction in Any Branch of Study

(j) “teaching or instruction in any branch of study” means teaching or instruction in a branch of study leading to three principal levels of qualifications at bachelor (undergraduate) masters (postgraduate) and doctoral levels .

Explanation

Section 2(j) limits the scope of the Act to the three traditional pillars of higher education, viz., Undergraduate (UG), Postgraduate (PG), and Doctoral (PhD) degrees. This means the SC, ST or OBC reservation does not automatically apply to short-term diplomas, certificate courses, or postdoctoral fellowships unless they fall under these three “principal levels.”

The Court held that for “specialized” and “super-specialty” courses, reservations should be applied cautiously. The Court emphasized that in certain highly technical fields of medicine or engineering, merit must remain the sole criterion to maintain global standards, effectively creating a “specialty exception” even if the course technically leads to a master’s or doctoral degree. [12]

Critics argue that while reservations at the undergraduate level help provide “equality of opportunity,” applying them to PG and PhD programs, where original research and high-level intellectual contribution are required, can dilute the research output of Central Educational Institutions. If a merit-based researcher with a groundbreaking proposal is displaced by a candidate solely to fulfill a quota, it is argued to be an injustice to the scientific or academic progress of the nation.

References

[1] “Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006”, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Dt. 9.1.2007, available at: https://www.pib.gov.in/newsite/erelcontent.aspx?relid=23895&reg=3&lang=2, Last visited on 20.2.2026
[2] Ashoka Kumar Thakur vs Union Of India And Ors [(2007) 2 SCT 655]
[3] Tandan Kumar & Ors. vs Universityof Delhi & Anr., Delhi High Court W.P.(C) 5329/2008
[4] Kshetrimayum Maheshkumar Singh vs The Manipur University [(2022) 2 SCC 704]
[5] Pichhda Jan Kalyan Samiti,Baba. Bhimrao Ambedkar Univ.& Ors. Vs. Union Of India,Thru.The Secy.,Ministry Of H.R.D. & Ors., Allahabad High Court, MISC. BENCH No. – 9643 of 2016
[6] P. V. Indiresan vs Union Of India & Ors [2011 AIR SCW 4855]
[7] State of Tamilnadu & Anr. Vs. Adhiyaman Educational & Research Institute & Ors., [(1995) 4 SCC 104 : JT 1995 (3) SC 136]
[8] Ritesh R. Sah v. Dr. Y.L.Yamul and Others, [(1996) 3 SCC 253]
[9] Pramati Educational & Cultural Trust vs Union Of India & Ors, [AIR 2014 SUPREME COURT 2114]
[10] The State Of Punjab vs Davinder Singh, Supreme Court of India [2024 INSC 562]
[11] Chebrolu Leela Prasad Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh [AIRONLINE 2020 SC 488]
[12] Faculty Association of AIIMS v. Union of India [AIR 2017 SUPREME COURT 1590]
[13] Atlas Cycle Industries Ltd. And Ors vs State Of Haryana [1979 SCC(CRI) 422]