Citing the apex court decisions in various reservation related cases, the Centre also contended that the principle of excluding the creamy layer has been developed in the context of OBC reservations and is not applicable to SCs and STs. (File Photo)The country’s reservation policy is based “not solely on economic status” but on “historical and social criteria like caste, tribe and social backwardness,” the Centre told the Supreme Court on Thursday, adding that its “modification…particularly to introduce income-based preferences within reserved categories, should be preceded by a holistic review and thorough empirical study, including socio-economic data of reserved category beneficiaries.”In a counter affidavit filed in the top court in response to a petition on June 15, 2026, the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment said that only the Parliament can take a call on the question of extending the creamy layer principle to Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST), and urged the court to reject a petition seeking directions to it to frame guidelines to introduce among others, income-based sub-quotas within reserved categories.The government further pointed out that the reliefs sought fall in the realm of policy, and urged the court to “refrain from directing the executive to frame policies on reservation or income-based preferences without empirical data or legislative mandate, keeping in view the separation of powers and judicial precedents”.The petition sought directions to the Centre to “frame policies for a more equitable and just system of reservation in government employment and educational opportunities thereby Ensuring Equitable Distribution of Reservation Benefits on a Merit-Cum-Means Approach” and/or “to implement/adopt the income-based preferences within each reserved category to ensure equitable distribution of benefits among economically weaker candidates belonging to SC, ST, Other Backward Classes (OBC), and Economically Weaker Sections (EWS)”.The petitioners also sought the court to direct the government “to frame guidelines to ensure that candidates from economically weaker backgrounds within each reserved category are treated as a sub-class, and accorded higher merit and priority in the selection process, in compliance with the law laid down…in the landmark case of State of Punjab & Ors v Davinder Singh & Ors,” wherein an Supreme Court constitution bench held that SCs and STs could be sub-classified for the purpose of reservation.Responding to this, the government pointed out that a five-judge Supreme Court bench had in its 2005 decision in E V Chinnaiah v State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors “held that whenever, a situation arises for exclusion of creamy layer from SCs, it will be the Parliament alone to take the necessary legislative steps in terms of clause (2) of Article 341 of the Constitution.”The Centre’s affidavit further pointed out that the “criteria for inclusion in the SC, ST, and Socially and Educationally Backward Class lists are based on historical, social, and economic backwardness. Scheduled Castes face historical disadvantage from untouchability, while Scheduled Tribes exhibit distinct cultures, geographical isolation, and backwardness. Socially and Educationally Backward Classes are identified by social, educational, and economic disadvantages, along with a lack of representation in services.”Story continues below this ad“These criteria,” the affidavit read, “are not spelt out in the Constitution but have become well established. Thus, the identification of SCs, STs, and Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBCs)/OBCs is based on historical and social criteria like caste, tribe, and social backwardness, not solely on economic status.”Citing the apex court decisions in various reservation related cases, the Centre also contended that the principle of excluding the creamy layer has been developed in the context of OBC reservations and is not applicable to SCs and STs.“It has nowhere specifically been held that the principle of creamy layer is applicable to SCs and STs…” and “this has been clarified by a Constitution Bench of” the court “in the case of Ashoka Kumar Thakur vs. Union of India…decided on 10.04.2008 that for the purpose of reservation the principles of creamy layer are not applicable to SCs and STs”, the counter affidavit pointed out.It added that “in majority of schemes of welfare and development of SCs, STs, and Socially and Educationally Backward Classes expecting reservation in educational institutions and reservation in services under the State, there are means to ensure that benefits of schemes percolate to those who actually deserve them.”