# K.C. VASANTH KUMAR & ANOTHER v. STATE OF KARNATAKA - **Citation:** [1985] Supp. 1 S.C.R. 352 - **Court:** Supreme Court of India - **Decided:** 1985-05-08 - **Case number:** Writ Petitions Nos. 1297-98, 1407 of 1979 - **Bench:** Y.V. Chandrachud, D.A. Desai, 0. Ch!Nnappa Reddy, A.P. Sen, E.S. Venkataramiah - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/k-c-vasanth-kumar-another-v-state-of-karnataka-9063 - **Pages:** 141 ## Headnote Constitution of India, 1950, Artie/es 15(4), 16(4), 29(2), 338(3) and 340Vafidi'tyofthe Means test a1optedin State of Karnataka order dated 22.2.1977 as modified by the Government Order dated March!, 1979 and June 27, 1979Guidelines for mllking special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationafly backward clasJes of citizens and provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward clarses of citizens which in to opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services of the StateConflict between ''the menitoriam principle and" the ''compensatory principle" of discrimination'• in the matter of admissions into institutions imparting higher educatian and of entry into Government service. how to be solved-Statutory construction of the word ~'Backward classes" ejusdem qenesis Rule or Rule Noscitur a sociir, explained-Construction of Articles 338(3) and 340 of the Constitutions-Government's power to make rerervaaons under Articles 15(4) and 16(4) and the extent of reservation that can be made, explained-Words and Phrases-Meaning of "backwardness'' "backward classes", "socially and educationally backward classes". In the pre~independant period, the former princely State of Mysore which now forms part of the State of Karnataka is one of the earliest States in the country in which the system of reservation for backward classes in public services was introduced. In 1918, the Government of His Highness the Maha· raja of Mysore appointed a committe under the chairmanship of Sir Leslie C. MilJer, Chief, Justice of the Chief Court of Mysore to investigate and report on the problem of backward classes. The questions referred to that Committee were (i) changes needed in the then existing rules of recruitment to the public services; (ii) special facilities to encourage higher and professional education among the members of backward classes and (iii) any other special measures which might be taken to increase the representation oF backward communities in the public service without materially affecting the efficiency, due regard being paid also to the general good accruing to the State by a wjder diffusion of education and feeling of increased status which will thereby be produced in the backward communities. The expressions 'backward classes' and 'backward communities, were used almost interchangeably and that the contained in Article 335 of the Constitution that any re~ervation made should not impair efficiency was anticipated more than three decades before the < onstitution was enacted. The committee submitted its report in 1921 containing its opinion that all communities in the State other than Brahmins should be understood as b~ckward communities regarding whom it n1ade certain recommendations. The ' t. • ~. K.c.v. KUMAR v. KARNATAKA 353 Government orders issued on the basis of that Report continued to be in force till 1956 i.e. there organisation of ~tates which brought together five integrating A units-the former State of Mysore (including Bellary District), Coorg, four dis~ tricts of Bombay, certain portions of the State of Hyderabad and the district of Sough Kanara and the Ko!legal Taluk which formerly formed part of the State of Madras. There were different lists of backward communities in the five integrating units and they were a11owed to continue for sometime even after the reorganisation of States. B In order to bring about uniformity the State Government issued a notification containing the list of backward classes for the purpose of Article 15(4) of the Constitution at the beginning of 1959. The validity of that notification and of another notification issued thereafter on the same topic which according to the State Government had treated all persons except Brahmins, Banias and Kayasthas as backward communities was challenged before the High Court of Mysore in Rama Krishna Singh v. State of Afysure, AlR 1950 Mysore 338. The two notifications \\ere struck down by the High ## Text _Characters 0–39,884 of 370,903. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39884 for what follows._ A B c D E F G H 352 K.C. VASANTH KUMAR & ANOTHER. v. STATE OF KARNATAKA May 8, 1985 (Y.V. CHANDRACHUD, C. J., D.A. DESAI, 0. CH!NNAPPA REDDY, A.P. SEN AND E.S. VENKATARAMIAH, JJ,J Constitution of India, 1950, Artie/es 15(4), 16(4), 29(2), 338(3) and 340Vafidi'tyofthe Means test a1optedin State of Karnataka order dated 22.2.1977 as modified by the Government Order dated March!, 1979 and June 27, 1979Guidelines for mllking special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationafly backward clasJes of citizens and provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward clarses of citizens which in to opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services of the StateConflict between ''the menitoriam principle and" the ''compensatory principle" of discrimination'• in the matter of admissions into institutions imparting higher educatian and of entry into Government service. how to be solved-Statutory construction of the word ~'Backward classes" ejusdem qenesis Rule or Rule Noscitur a sociir, explained-Construction of Articles 338(3) and 340 of the Constitutions-Government's power to make rerervaaons under Articles 15(4) and 16(4) and the extent of reservation that can be made, explained-Words and Phrases-Meaning of "backwardness'' "backward classes", "socially and educationally backward classes". In the pre~independant period, the former princely State of Mysore which now forms part of the State of Karnataka is one of the earliest States in the country in which the system of reservation for backward classes in public services was introduced. In 1918, the Government of His Highness the Maha· raja of Mysore appointed a committe under the chairmanship of Sir Leslie C. MilJer, Chief, Justice of the Chief Court of Mysore to investigate and report on the problem of backward classes. The questions referred to that Committee were (i) changes needed in the then existing rules of recruitment to the public services; (ii) special facilities to encourage higher and professional education among the members of backward classes and (iii) any other special measures which might be taken to increase the representation oF backward communities in the public service without materially affecting the efficiency, due regard being paid also to the general good accruing to the State by a wjder diffusion of education and feeling of increased status which will thereby be produced in the backward communities. The expressions 'backward classes' and 'backward communities, were used almost interchangeably and that the contained in Article 335 of the Constitution that any re~ervation made should not impair efficiency was anticipated more than three decades before the < onstitution was enacted. The committee submitted its report in 1921 containing its opinion that all communities in the State other than Brahmins should be understood as b~ckward communities regarding whom it n1ade certain recommendations. The ' t. • ~. K.c.v. KUMAR v. KARNATAKA 353 Government orders issued on the basis of that Report continued to be in force till 1956 i.e. there organisation of ~tates which brought together five integrating A units-the former State of Mysore (including Bellary District), Coorg, four dis~ tricts of Bombay, certain portions of the State of Hyderabad and the district of Sough Kanara and the Ko!legal Taluk which formerly formed part of the State of Madras. There were different lists of backward communities in the five integrating units and they were a11owed to continue for sometime even after the reorganisation of States. B In order to bring about uniformity the State Government issued a notification containing the list of backward classes for the purpose of Article 15(4) of the Constitution at the beginning of 1959. The validity of that notification and of another notification issued thereafter on the same topic which according to the State Government had treated all persons except Brahmins, Banias and Kayasthas as backward communities was challenged before the High Court of Mysore in Rama Krishna Singh v. State of Afysure, AlR 1950 Mysore 338. The two notifications \\ere struck down by the High Court holding (al in as much as the impugned notifications contained list of backward classes includ· ing SS per cent of the pop,Jation of the State and all Hindu communities other than Brahmins, Banias and Kayasthas and all other non-Hindu communities in the State except Anglo-Indians and Parsees had been treated as backward classes it resulted more in a discrimination against the few exclucfed communities consisting of about 5 per cent of the total population rather than making provision for socially and educationally backward classes; (b) making provision for con1munities which were slightly backward to tl·.e socalled forward communities did not amount to making provision for the communities which really needed protection under Article (15(4) of the Constitution; (c) socially and educationally backward classes can in some cases be determined on the basis of castes. Thererore, the State Government constituted a Comn1ittee on January 8, 1960 under the Chairmanship of Dr R. t\agan Gowda for the purpose of determining the criteria for the classification of backward classes in the State with the follOVling terms of refercr.ce: (i) to suggest the criteria to be adopted in determining which sections of the people in the State should be treated as socially and educationally backward and (ii) to suggest the exact manner in which the criteria thus indicated should be followed to enable the State Government to determine the persons who should secure such preference as may be determined by Government in respect of adn1issions to technical institutions and appointment to Government services. The said committee submitted its Interim Report on February 19, 1960. On the basis of the Interim Report of the committee, the State Government passed an order dated June 9, l9l0 regarding admissions to professional and technical institutions reserving 22 per cent of seats for backward classes, 15 per cent for Scheduled Castes and 3 per cent for Scheduled Tribes and the remaining 60 per cent of seats were allowed to be filled upon the basis of merit. The order of the Government was challenged before the High Court of M}sore in S.A. Parlha & Ors. v. The State of Mysore & Ors. A.1.R. 1961 Mys. 220. The High Court found that the direction contained in the Government order to the effect that if any seat or s~ats reserved for candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes c E F G H A B J c D E . F G H 354 SUPRBMB COURT REPORTS [1985] SUPPL. S.C.R. and Scheduled Tribes remained unfilled, the same shall be filled by candidates of other backward classes was unconstitutional. It also gave som~ directions regarding the manner in which the calculation of the quota of reservation be made. Thereafter the Final Report was submitted by the Nagan Gowda Committee on May 16, 1961. After taking into consideration the recommendations made in the said Report. the State Government issued an order for the purpose of Article 15 (4) of the Constitution on July 10, 1961. By that order, the State Government specified 81 classes of people as backward classes and 135 classes of people as more backward classes and reserved 30 per cent of seat-professional and technical institutions for backward and more backward classes. 15 per cent and 3 per cent of the seats were reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes respectively and the remaining 52 per cent of the seats were allowed to be filled up on merit. This order was challenged before the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitutions in M.R. Balaji & Ors. v. State of Mysore [1963] Supp, I SCR 439. In this land mark decision of the Supreme Court, the meaning of the term ''sociaJly and educationally backward classes" appearing in Article 1~{4) was explained as "The backwardness under Article 15(4) must be social and educational. It is not either social or educational but it is both social and educational." After explaining as to how social and educational backwardness has to be determined, and the question of determination of the classes which were educationally backward, the court held that the inclusion of the members of the Lingayat community in the list of backward classes was erroneo•Js. On the question of extent of rese.rvation that can be made the Court held that "speaking generally and in a broad way, a special provision should be Jess then 50 per cent; how much less than 50 per cent should depend upon the relevant prevailing circumstances in each case." and thus allowed the petition. Thereafter, the Government passed another order dated July 26, 1963 which directed that 30 per cent of the seats in professional and technical colleges and institutions should be reserved for backward classes as defined in that order and that 18 per cent of the seats should be reserved for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The criteria laid down in that order for determining social and economic backwardness were two-fold-income and occupation. It stated that those who followed occupations of agriculture, petty business, inferior service, crafts or other occupations in .. olvir.g manual labour and whose family income was less than Rs. 1,200 per annum were to be treated as belonging to backward classes. This order was questioned before the High Court in D.G. Viswanath v. Government of Mysore & Ors. A.I.R. 1964 Mys. 132 by some petitioners on various grounds. The High Court dismissed the petitions observing that the determination of the backward classes without reference to caste altogether was not correct and it expressed the hope that the State would make a more appropriate classification lest its bonafides should be questioned. Jn the appeal filed against this judgment in R. Chitra/ekha & Anr. v. State of Mysore & Ors. [1964] 6 SCR 368 the Supreme Court explained the inconsistency between the High Court judgment with the decision in Balaji's case and observed that "Two principles stand out prominently from. • K.c.v. KUMAR v. KARNAKAll!A 355 Balaji, name1y, (i) the caste of a group of citizens may be a relevant circumstance in ascertaining their social backwardness; and (ii) though it is a relevant A factor to determine the social backwardness of class of citizens, it cannot be the sole or dominant test in that behalf-casts is only a relevant circumstance in ascertaining the backwardness of a class and there is nothing in the judgment of the Supreme Court which precludes the authority concerned from determining the social backwardness of a group of citizens if it can do so without reference to caste." While this Court has not excluded caste from ascertaining the backwardness of a class of citizens, it has not made it one of B compelling circumstances, affording a basis for the ascertainment of backwardness of a class. Thereafter the State Government appointed the Karnataka Backward Classes Commission under the Chairmanship of Sri L.G. Havanur which after an elaborate enquiry submitted its report in four massive volumes on November 19, 1975. The Commission recommended that person belonging to backward classes for purposes of Article 15(4) of the Constitution should be divided into three groups-(a) backward communities consisting of 15 castes (b) backward castes consisting of 128 castes and (c) backward tribes consisting of 62 tribes. For purposes of Article 16{4) of the Constitution, the Commission divided the backward classes into (a) backward communities consisting of 9 castes( b) backward castes consisting of 115 castes and (c) backward tribes consisting of 61 tribes. According to the Commission, backward communities were those castes whose student average of students passing SSLC examination in 1972 per thousand of population was below the State average (which was 1.69 per thousand) but abo\e 50 per cent of the State average and backward castes and backward tribes were those castes and tribes whose student average was below 50 per cent of the : tate average except in the case of Dombars and Voddars and those who were J..Jomadic and de-notified tribes. The total population of these backward classes (other than Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes), according to the Commission, was about 45 per cent of total population of the State. The difference between the two lists- one under Article 15(4) and the other under Article 16(4) of the Constitution was due to the exclusion of certain comn1unities, castes and tribes ~'hich were socially and educationally backward but which had adequate representation in the services from the list prepared for the purpose of Article 16(4). The Commission recommended both for purpose; of Article 15(4) and Article 16(4) the percentage of reservations: (i) Backward communities 16 per cent; (ii) Backward Castes 10 per cent; and (iii) Backward Tribes 6 per cent and total 32 per cent. The reservation of 32 per cent along with 18 per cent reserved for Scheduled Casts and Scheduled Tribes together amounted to 50 per cent of the total seats or posts, as the case may be. The Commission further recommended if seats/posts remained unfilled in the quota allotted to backward tribes, they should be made over to backward con1munities and backward castes. Similar. ly if seats/posts remain unfilled in the quota_ allotted to backward castes, they should be made over to backward communities and backward tribes. If, however, seats/posts remain unfilled in the quota allottecl to any of those three categories, they should be madeover to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. In the event of seats 'posts remaining unfilled by any of these cateiJorics they should be transferred to the ~en~ral pool, c D E F G A B c D E G H 356 IUPRBME COURT REPORTS [1985) SUPPL. s.c.R. After considering the said Report, the State Government issued an order dated February 22, 1977 whereunder it listed the Backward communities. Backward Castes and Backward Tribes who shall be treated as Backward classes for purposes of Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution of India. The order clarified, (a) that only such citizens of these Backward Classes whose family income per annum from all sources 1f Rs. 8000 (Eight thou~ sands only) and below shall be entitled to special treatment under these Articles and (b) that five categories, namely; an actual cultivator, an artisan, a petty businessman, one holding an appointment either in Government service or corresponding services under private employment including casual labour; and any person self employed or engaged in any occupation involving manual labour" of citizens shall be considered as a special group such citizens of this special group whose family income is Rs. 4,800 (Ruppes four thousand and eight hundred only) and below per annum shall be eligible for special treatment under the two Articles. The order further noted that li) Family income means income of the citizen and his parents and if either of the parents is dead. his legal guardian; and (b) to fix the reservation for purposes of Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution in respect of the Backward classes and the special group of citizens at 40 per cent. the allocation being Backward Communities (20 per cent), Backward castes (JO per cent), Backward Tribes (5 per cent), and special group (5 per cent). In the list of backward communities mentioned in the Government order. the State Government included ' .• r us1ims' thus 1naking a total of 16 backward communities. In the list of backward castes, there were 129 castes including converts into Christianity from Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes upto second generation and 62 ~ cheduled Tribes. The reservation for backward classes was 40 percent and taken along with 18 per cent for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, the total reservation of seats/posts came to 58 per cent leaving only 42 per cent for merit pool. The Government order dated February 22, 1977 and another notification dated March 4, 1977 issued for purposes of Article 16( 4) had also been challenged in a number of writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court ofKarnataka in S.C. Somashekarappa & Ors. v. Slate of Karnataka & Ors. (Writ Petition No 43il of 1977 and connected wrjt petition disposed of on April 9, 1979). Allowing the petitions; the High Court quashed (i) the inclusion of' Arasu' community in the list of 'Backward Communities' both for purposes of Article 15(4) and Article 16(4); (ii) the inclusion of the (a) Balija (b) Devadiga (c) Ganiga (d) Nayinda (e) Rajput and (f) Satani in the list of backward communities and the inclusion of (a) Banna (b) Gurkha (c) Jat (d) Konga (e) Kotari (f) Koyava (g) Malayali (h) Maniyanani or (Muniyani) (i) Padatti (j) Padiyar (k) Pandavakul (I) Raval and (m) Rawat in the list of backward clases for purposes of Article 16(4) of the Constitution; and (iii) resrrvation of 20 per cent made for Backward communities in the State Civil Services under Article 16(4), reserving liberitv to the State Government to determine the extent of reservation in accordance with Jaw. The classification and reservation in other respects was upheld. Special Leave Petitions (Civil) No. 6656 of 1979 and 9854/1979 are filed against the saiq j\.ld~m.eot '?f the Hi~h Court under Arti~le J 36 of the Constitution1 - k.C.V. KUMAR v. KARNATAl!iA 357 After the said judgment of the High Court, by an order dated May l 1979 the reservation for backward com1nunities was reduced to 18 per cent f~r p~rposes of Article 16(4). By an order dated June 27, 1979, the State Government modilled the Government order dated February 22, 1977 by increasing the reservation for •special Group" from 5 per cent to 15 per cent both for purposes of Article 15(4) and Article 16(4) of the Constitution. Thus as on date, the total reservation for purposes of Article 15(4) is 68 per cent and for purposes of Article 16(4) is 66 per cent. There are only 32 per cent seats in professional and technical colleges and 34 per cent poqs ia Govern· ment services which can be filled up on the basis of merit. These writ petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, s~ek to challenge the Constitutional validity of the State Government orders dated February 22, 1977 as modified by the Government orders dated May I, 1979 and Juce 27, 1979. A 8 Disposing of the petitions and the appeals by Special Leave, the Court C expressed their following opinions, Per Chandrachud, C.J. The followjng propositions on the issue of reservation ma),. serve as a guideline to the Commission which the Government of Karnataka proposes to D appoint, for examining the question of affording better employn1ent and educational opportunities to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes which problem is a burning issue to-day. t.. The reservation in favour of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes must continue as to present, there is, without the appJication of a means test, for a further period not exceeding fifteen years. Another fifteen years will make it fifty years after the advent of the Constitution, a period reasonably long for the upper crust of the oppressed cla~ses to overcome the baneful effects of social oppression, isolation and humiliation. [376 C-D] 2. The means test, that is to say, the test of economic backwardness ought to be made applicable even to t1:.e Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes after the period mentioned in (1) above. Jt is essential that the priviledged section of the underprivileged society should not be permitted to monopolise preferantial benefits for an indefinite period of time. (376E·FJ 3. In so far as the Other Backward Classes are concerned, two tests should be conjunctively applied for identifying them for the purpose of reservations in employment and education : One, that they should be comparable to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the matter of their backwardness; and two, that they should satisfy the means test such as a State Government may lay down in the context of prevailing economic conditions. [376 F-G] 4. The policy of reservations in employment, education and legislative institutions should be reviewed every five years or so. That will at once afford an opportunity (i) to the State to ractify distortions arising out of particular facts of the reservation policy and (ii) to the people, both backward and nonE F G H A 8 c. D. E F G H 358 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1985) SUPPL. s.c.R.. backward, to ventilate their views in a public debate on the practical impact of the policy of reservations. (376 H; 377 A] Per Desai. J For a period of three and half decades, the unending search for identifying soCially and educationally backward classes of citizens has defined the policy makers, the interpreters of the policy as reflected in statutes or executive administrative orders and has added a spurt in the reverse direction, namely, those who attempted to move upward (Pratilom) in the social hierachy have put the movement in reverse gear so as to move downwards (Anulom) in order to be identified as a group or class of citizens socially and educationally backward. The Constitution promised an egalitarian society; it was a caste ridden stratified hierarchical society. Therefore, in the early stages of the functioning of the Constitution it was accepted without dissent or dialogue that caste furnishes a working criterian for identifying socially and educationally backward class or citizens for the purpose or Article 1;(4J. [377 D-G) The language of Article 15(4) refers to 'class' and not caste. Preferential treatment which cannot be struck down as discriminatory was to be accorded a class, shown to be socially and edu;ationally backward and not to the members of a caste who may be presumed to be socially and educationally backward. [378 A-BJ It is clear from the decisions of the Supreme Court that same vacillation on the part of the judiciary on the question whether the caste should be the basis for recognising the backwardness. Judiciary retained its- traditional blindfold on its eyes and thereby ignored perceived realities. The expression 'backward classes' is not defined. Courts, therefore· have more or less in the absence of well-defined criteria not based on caste label has veered round to the view that in order to be socially and educationally backward classes, the group must have the same indicia as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. (378 E; 384 E-F] Stal~ of Madras v. Srhnathi Champakam Dorairajad & Anr. {1951] SCR 525; M.R. Balaji & Ors. v. State of Mysore (1963] Supp. I SCR 439; T. Devadesan v. The Union of India & Anr. [1964] 4 SCR 680; R. Chitralekha & Anr. v. StateofMysore&Ors.[1964]6 SCR 368; Triloki Nath & Anr. v. State of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors. [1967] 2 SCR 265; Tri/oki Na1h & Anr. v. State of Jammu & Kashn1ir &: Ors. (1969] 1SCR103; A. Peeriakaruppan t'tc. v. State of Tamil Nadu (1971] 2 SCR 430; State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. v. U.S. V. Bairam etc. [1972) 3 SCR 247; Janki Prasad Parimoo & Ors. etc. etc. v. State of JamnJu & Kashmir & Ors. [ 1973] 3 SCR 236; State of Uttar Pradesh v. Pradip Tandon & Ors. (1976] 2 SCR 761; State of Kera/a & Anr. v. N.M. Thomas & Ors. (1976) I SCR 906; Kumari K.S. Jayasru & Anr. v. The State of Kera/a & Anr. [1977] I SCR 194; and Akhil Bhartiya Soshit Karamchari Sangh (Railway) represented by its Assistant General Secretary on behalf of the Association v. Union of India & Ors. (1981] 2 SCR 185, referred to. A caste is a horizental segmental division of society spread over a district of a region or the whole State and also sometimes outside it. The .. k.c.v. KUMAR v. KARNATAKA 359 concept of purity and impurity conceptualises the caste system. There are four essential features of the caste systen1 which maintained in homo hierarchicus character; (i) hierarchy (ii) comn:ensality (iiiJ restrictions on marriage and (iv} hereditary occupation. Most of the caste are endogamous groups. Inter-marriage between two groups is impermissible. But 'Pratilom' marriages are not wholly unknown. Similarly with the onward movl!ment of urbanisation, members of various castes are slowly giving up, traditional occupations and the pure impure avocations is being frowned upon by developing notion of dignity of labour. As the fruits of independence were unequally distributed amongst various segments of the society, in each caste there came into existence a triple division based on economic resurgence amongst the members of the caste. Those who have become economically well off have acquired an upper class status (class consciousness) and the one on the step below is the middle class and the third one belongs to poorer section of the caste. This led to the realisation that caste culture does not help economic interest. In fact the upper crust of the same caste is verily accused of exploiting the lower strata of the same caste. Therefore, the basis of the caste system namely, purity and pollution is slowly being displaced by the economic condition of the various scgn1ents of the same caste. It is recognised on almost all hands that the important feature of the caste strJcture are progressively sufTering erosion. The new organisation, th{! so-called caste organisation, is substantially different from the traditional caste structure and caste councils. Econornic differentiation amongst the members of the caste has becon1e sharp, but not so sharp as to bury caste sentiments and ties. In the face of this transforn1ation of the caste structure, caste label can not be accepted as the basis for determining social and educational backwardness, but the class or the social group should be examined [385 C-H; 386 A-DJ Caste in rural society is more often than not mirrored in the economic power wielded by it and vice versa. Social hiearchy and econorr.ic position exhibit an undisputablf: mutuality. The lower the caste, the pcorer its rr1embers. The poorer the members of a caste, the lower the caste. Caste and economic situation, reflecting each other as they do are the Deus ex··Machina of the social A B c D E status occupied and the economic power wielded by an individual or class in rural society. Social status and economic power are so ¥:oven and fusfd into F the cate system in Indian rural society that one may, without hesitation, say that if poverty be the cause, caste is the primary index of social back1~·ardness, so that social backwardness is often readily identifiable with reference to ape"'son's caste. So sadly and oppressively deep-rooted is caste ia our country that it has cut across even the barriers of religion. The caste system has penetrated other religious and dissentient Hindu sects to whom the practice of caste should be G anathema and today we find that practitioner of other religious faiths and Hindu dissentients are some times as rigid adherents to the system of caste as the conservative Hindus. [386 E-H] Shared situation in the economic hierarchy, caste gradation, occupation, habitation, style of consumption, standard of literacy and a variety of such H other factors appear to go to make towards social and educational backward~ ness. Thus there is a mad rush for being recognised as belonging to a caste A B c D E F G H 36U SUPREME COURt REPORTS (1985) SUPPL. s.C.11.. which by its nomenclature would be included in the list of socially and educationally backward classes. Certain castes are known by a number of synonymy which vary from one region to the other and making their complete coverage almost impossible. The only way out would in such a situation is to treat, if a particular caste has been treated as backward, all its synonyms whether mentioned in the State lists or not as backward. Again, some of the castes just for the sake of being considered socially and educationally backward, have degraded themselves to such an extent that they had no hesitation in attributing different types of vices to and associating other factors indicative of backwardness, with their castes. The on1y remedy for such a malaise is to devise a method for determining socially and educationally backward classes without reference to caste, beneficial to all sections of people irrespective of the caste to which they belong. (387 B-H; 388 A] A few other aspects for rejecting caste as the basis for identifying social and educational backwardness are: (i) lf State patronage for preferred treatment accepts caste as the only insignia for determining social and educational backwardness; the danger looms large that this approach alone would legitimise and perpetuate caste system. It does not go well with our proclaimed sc~ular character as enshrined in the Preamble to the Constitution. The assumption that all members of some caste are equally socially and educationally backward is not well-founded. Such an approach provides an over simplification of r. complex problem of identifying the social and educational backwardaess : (ii) it is recognised reservation has been usurped by the economically well-placed section in the same caste; and (iii) the caste is, as. is understood in Hindu Society unknown to Muslims, Parsis, Jews etc. As such, caste criterion would not furnish a reliable yardstick to identify socially and educationally backward group in the aforesaid communities though economic backwardness would. (388 F-G; 389 A;Fj Therefore, the only criterion which can be realistically devised is the one of economic backardaess. To this 1nay be added some relevant criteria such as the secular character of the group, its opportunity for earning livelihood etc , but by and large economic backwardness must be the load-star. [389 F] Chronic poverty is the bane of Indian Society. Market economy and money spinning culture has transforn1ed the general behaviour of the society towards its members. Upper caste does not enjoy the status or respect, traditional, voluntary or forced any more even in rural areas what to speak of highly westernised urban society. The bank balance, the property holding and the money power determine the social status of the individual and guarantee the opportunities to rise to the top echelon. How the wealth is acquired has Jost significance. Purity of means disappeared with Mahatama Gandhi and we have reached a stage where end-; determine the means. This is the present disturbing situation whether one likes it or not. {389 G·H; 390 A-BJ Reservation in one or other form has been there for decades. If a survey is made with reference to families in various castes considered to be sociaJly and educationaUy backward, about the benefits of preferred treatment, it would - K.C.V. KUMAR V. 1'ARTATAKA 361 unmistakably show that the benefits of reservations arc snatched away by the top cre1my layer of the backward castes. This has to be avoided at any cost. [390 E] If econon1ic criterion for compensatory discrimination or affirmative action is accepted, it w0uld strike at the root cause of social and educational backwardness, and simultaneously take a vital step in the direction of destruction of caste struclure which in turn would advance the secular character of the Nation. This approach seeks to translate into reality the twin constitutional goals.: one, to strike at the perpetuation of the caste stratification of the Indian Society so as to arrest progressive movement and to take a firm step towards establishing a casteless society; and two, to progressively eliminate the disadvantageous section.s of the society to raise their position and be part of the mainstream of life which means eradication of poverty. However, this does not deal with reservation in favour of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Thousands of years of discrimination and exploitation cannot be wiped out in one generation. But even here economiccriterion is worth applying by refusing preferred treatn1ent to those amongst them who have already benefitted by it and improved their position. And finally reservation must have a time span otherwise concession tend to become vested interests. [391 E-H; 392 A] Per Chinnappa Reddy J. A B c D The paradox of the system of reservation that may be made under Articles 15l4), 16(4) read with 29(2) of the Constitution is that it has engendered a spirit of self denigration among the people. Nowhere else in the world do castes, classes or comn1unities queue up for the sake of gaining the backward status. Nowhere else in the world is there competition to assert E backwardness and to claim 'we are more backward than )OU'. This is an unhappy and disquieting situation, but it is stark reality. (392 E~F] 2. The Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and other socially and educationally backward classes, all of whom have been compendiously described as 'the weaker sections of the people', hfl.ve long journeys to make F unsociety. They need aid; they need facility; they need launching; they need propulsion. Their needs are their demands. The demands are matters of right and not of philanthropy. They ask for parity, and not charity. They claim their constitutional right to equality of status and of opportunity and econon1ic and social justice .. Several bridges have to be erected, so that they may cross the Rubicon. Professional education and employment under the State are thought to be two such bridges. Hence the special provision for G advancement and for reservation under Artil'les 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution, [393 C-D] 3. Courts arc not necessarily the 111ost con1petent to identify the backward classes or to lay down guidelines for their identification ex.cept in a broad and very general way. Courts are not equipped for that; Courts have no H legal barometers to measure social backwardness and are truly removed from the peopl•, particularly those of the backward classes, by layer upon layer of gradation and degradation. And, India is such a vast country that conditions A B c D E F 362 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (19851 SUPPL s.e.a. vary from State to State, region to region, ~district to district and from one ethnic religious, linguistic or caste group to another. A test to identifv backward classes which may appear appropriate when applied to one g~oup of people may be wholly inappropriate and unreasonable if applied to another group of people. There can be no universal test; there can be no exclusive test; there can be no conclusive test. In fact, it may be futile to apply and rigid tests. One may to look at the generality and the totality of the situation. [398 A-CJ 4. Before attempting to lay down any guideline for the purpose of determining the methods to be adopted for identifying the socially and educationally backward classes one should guard against the pitfaIJs of the traditional approach to the question, which has genera!Iy been superior, elitist and, therefore. ambivalent. The result is that the claim of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes to equality as a matter of human and constitutional right is forgotten and their rights are submerged in what is described as the "Preferential principle'' or "protective or compensatory discrimination". Unlesli these superior, patromising and paternalist attitudes are got rid off. It is difficult to truly appreciate the problems involved in the claim of the ~c~eduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other backv;ard classes for their legitimate share of the benefits arising out of their belonging to humanity and to a country whose constitution preaches justice, social, economic and political and equality of status and opportunity for all. [393 E-H] 5. There is neither statistical basis nor expert evidence to support the assumption that efficiency will necessarily be impaired if reservation exceeds 50%. if reservation is carded forward or if reservation is extended to promo~ tional posts. The word 'efficiency' is neither sacro-sanct nor is the sanctorum has to be fiercely guarded. 'Efficiency' is not a Mantra which is whispered by the Guru in the Sishya•s ear. The m.,re securing of high marks at an examination may not necessarily mar~ out a good administrator. An e'.ficient administrator, one takes it, must be one who possesses among other qualities the capacity to understand with sympathy and, therefore, to tackle bravely ·the problems of a large segment of population constituting the weaker sections of the people. This does not mean that efficiency in civil service is unnece~sary or that it is a myth. However, one need not make a fastidious fetish of it. It may be that for certain posts, only the best may be appointed and for cretain cour~es of study only the best m:.iy be admitted. Jf so, rules may provide for reservation for appointment to such posts and for admission to such courses. The rules may provide for an appropriate method of sel