Why in the News?
The Karnataka Cabinet has officially approved a new internal reservation matrix for Scheduled Castes (SCs), following the landmark 2024 Supreme Court ruling that permits states to sub-classify reserved categories.
What is the Decision?
A strategic redistribution of the 15% SC reservation into three distinct categories to ensure equitable opportunities among 101 different sub-castes.
The Internal Reservation Matrix
| Category | Targeted Communities | Allocation (%) |
| Category 1 | Madigas and allied castes (Dalit Left) | 5.25% |
| Category 2 | Holeyas and allied castes (Dalit Right) | 5.25% |
| Category 3 | Bhovi, Lambani, Korama, Koracha & 59 nomadic groups | 4.5% |
Note: Dalit Left and Right refer to the internal sub-classification of Scheduled Castes (SCs) in India, particularly in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, categorized for internal reservation purposes.
Timeline & Legal Context
- 1992: Indira Sawhney Case – SC caps total reservation at 50%.
- 2004: E.V. Chinnaiah Case – SC initially rules that states cannot sub-classify SCs.
- 2024: State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh – SC 7-judge bench overrules Chinnaiah, allowing sub-classification based on empirical data.
- 2024 (Oct): Karnataka Cabinet approves the new 5.25 : 5.25 : 4.5 formula.
Objectives & Challenges
- Social Justice
- Addresses the long-standing grievance that “advanced” sub-castes within the SC list were cornering most benefits.
- Focuses on the “creamy layer” principle within SCs to reach the most marginalized.
- Legal Hurdles
- Quantifiable Data: The state must prove under-representation with empirical evidence to survive judicial review.
- 50% Ceiling: The state’s total reservation (including ST and OBC) currently pushes to 56%, which is under challenge in the High Court.
| [2023] Consider the following statements: Statement – I:The Supreme court of India has held in some judgements that the reservation policies made under Article 16 (4) of the constitution of India would be limited Article 335 for maintenance of efficiency of administration. Statement – II:Article 335 of the Constitution of India defines the term ‘efficiency of administration’. Which of the following is correct in respect of the above statements? [A] Both statement – I and Statement – II are correct explanation for statement – I [B] Both statement – I and statement – II are correct and statement II is not the correct explanation for statement I [C] Statement – I is correct but statement – II is incorrect. [D] Statement – I is incorrect but statement – II is correct. |
