Reservation in India: Constitutional Articles, Categories, Percentage and Debates

What Is Reservation in India: Meaning and Basis

On What Basis Reservation Is Given: Backwardness and Representation

The idea behind the policy is that equal rules do not help people who start far behind. Instead of only forbidding discrimination, the State sets aside places for groups that equal rules alone would not lift. The makers of the Constitution held that the mere granting of the right to equality was not enough to overcome the age-old injustices suffered by the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, so special constitutional measures were required to advance their interests.

Reservation is given on the basis of social and educational backwardness together with inadequate representation in the services of the State. The Constitution words the test differently for each sphere. Article 15(4) speaks of "socially and educationally backward classes of citizens" and of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Article 16(4) allows reservation in favour of any backward class of citizens which, in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State.

The Economically Weaker Sections are the exception. Their quota rests on family income and other indicators of economic disadvantage, notified by the State, and not on caste. The Supreme Court recognised in 1992 that the Constitution speaks of social and educational backwardness, not of economic backwardness alone, which is why the EWS quota needed a separate amendment.

Is Reservation a Fundamental Right: Enabling Provisions Explained

Reservation is not a fundamental right of any individual. Articles 15(4), 16(4) and 16(4A) are enabling provisions, which allow the State to reserve but do not oblige it to do so. In M. Nagaraj v. Union of India (2006) the Supreme Court held that the State is not bound to make reservation for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in promotion. The right that a citizen can claim is equal opportunity under Article 16(1); reservation is the exception that serves the same goal.

Vertical and Horizontal Reservation Explained

Vertical reservation is the reservation for the social categories themselves: SC, ST, OBC and EWS. Each is a separate block of seats and a candidate falls into only one of them. Horizontal reservation cuts across these blocks. It is given to groups such as women, persons with disabilities and ex-servicemen, and a selected candidate is counted inside whichever vertical category he or she belongs to. Article 15(3), which allows special provision for women and children, is the constitutional base for the quota for women.

Uttarakhand shows the difference. Besides its vertical quotas, the State gives 30 per cent horizontal reservation to women, 5 per cent to ex-servicemen and 4 per cent to persons with disabilities. A woman from the Scheduled Castes selected under the women's quota fills an SC seat, so the vertical total does not rise.

Where Reservation Applies: Jobs, Education, Legislatures and Local Bodies

The reservation system in India works in four spheres, and each has its own constitutional source.

• Government jobs: Posts in government service are reserved under Article 16(4), with promotion quotas for SCs and STs under Article 16(4A).
• Educational institutions: Seats at admission are reserved under Articles 15(4) and 15(5).
• Legislatures: Seats in the Lok Sabha and the State Assemblies are reserved for SCs and STs under Articles 330 and 332. Of the 543 elected seats in the Lok Sabha, 84 are reserved for Scheduled Castes and 47 for Scheduled Tribes (as on 26 January 2019).
• Local bodies: Seats in panchayats are reserved under Article 243D and in municipalities under Article 243T.

A reserved constituency is one in which only a member of the reserved group may contest, but every voter in the constituency votes. This was the system chosen in the Constituent Assembly in place of separate electorates. The Constitution makes no similar reservation of Lok Sabha seats for other disadvantaged groups.

History of Reservation in India: From Kolhapur to the Constitution

Reservation Before 1947: Kolhapur, Madras and the Poona Pact

Reservation in India is older than the Constitution. Shahu Maharaj, ruler of the princely state of Kolhapur, issued a reservation order on 26 July 1902 that provided 50 per cent reservation in government jobs and education for backward classes. Other governments followed over the next four decades.

• 1918, Mysore: The Maharaja created a committee to implement reservation for non-Brahmins in government jobs and education.
• 1921, Madras Presidency: The Justice Party government, the first elected body in Indian legislative history to legislate reservation, passed the first Communal Government Order (G.O. 613) on 16 September 1921.
• 1932, Communal Award: Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald's award extended separate electorates to the depressed classes.
• 1932, Poona Pact: After Gandhi fasted against separate electorates, a pact signed at Yerwada Central Jail on 24 September 1932 settled on 148 reserved seats within joint electorates.
• 1942: The Scheduled Castes gained 8.5 per cent reservation in central services for the first time.

The Poona Pact fixed a principle that still shapes political reservation, namely seats reserved for the depressed classes inside a common electorate and not separate electorates.

Reservation After 1950: Champakam, the First Amendment and Backward Classes Commissions

The Constitution came into force in 1950 with seat reservation for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in legislatures. Education quotas ran into Article 29(2). In State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan (1951) the Supreme Court held that a caste-based order for college seats violated Article 29(2), and Parliament answered with the First Amendment, which added Article 15(4) from 18 June 1951.

The question of the Other Backward Classes took far longer. The first Backward Classes Commission was appointed in 1953 under Kaka Kalelkar and reported in 1955, but no action was taken on it because its recommendations were considered too vague. Backward-class reservation stayed largely a State matter until the Mandal Commission of 1979 reopened it nationally.

Mandal Commission and the 1990 Order

The Mandal Commission, or Second Backward Classes Commission, was established in 1979 by the Janata Party government and headed by B. P. Mandal. It judged castes on eleven social, educational and economic indicators and gave social indicators 3 points each, educational indicators 2 points and economic indicators 1 point. Any caste that scored 11 of the possible 22 points was listed as backward.

• Finding: Using the 1931 census, the commission estimated that 52 per cent of the population, belonging to 3,743 castes and communities, was backward.
• Recommendation: 27 per cent reservation for OBCs in central government jobs, public undertakings and higher education. The figure was kept below the share of the population so that, with 22.5 per cent for SCs and STs, the total stayed under 50 per cent.
• Other advice: Land reform and other steps to improve the condition of the OBCs.

The report of 1980 lay unused for about a decade. In August 1990 the National Front government under V. P. Singh decided to implement the reservation of central government jobs for OBCs, and the order of 13 August 1990 sparked violent anti-Mandal protests in many cities of north India. The OBC share in higher education came later with the 93rd Amendment, which inserted Article 15(5) in force from 20 January 2006.

Constitutional Provisions on Reservation: Articles 15, 16, 46, 330 and 335

Articles 15 and 16: The Equality Code and Its Exceptions

Reservation sits inside the equality code of Articles 14 to 17. Article 14 guarantees equality before the law, Article 15 prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth, Article 16 guarantees equality of opportunity in public employment and Article 17 abolishes untouchability. The reservation clauses are written into Articles 15 and 16 as exceptions that serve the same goal of equality.

Two phrases do most of the work in Article 16(4): "backward class" and "adequately represented". The second means that job reservation is a remedy for under-representation, which is why courts keep asking the State for data on representation. Article 15(5) also settles a point that is often tested. Because the Constitution itself keeps minority educational institutions outside the admission quota, no body can require them to reserve seats for the Scheduled Castes.

Article 15(5) and the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006, were upheld in Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India (10 April 2008), where the Court allowed the 27 per cent OBC quota in government-funded institutions and again insisted that the creamy layer be excluded.

Articles 46, 335 and 243D: Welfare, Efficiency and Local Bodies

Outside Part III, three provisions complete the framework.

1. Article 46: A Directive Principle under which the State shall promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, in particular the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, and protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation.
2. Article 335: The claims of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes shall be taken into consideration, consistently with the maintenance of efficiency of administration, in appointments to services and posts of the Union and the States. A proviso added by the 82nd Amendment allows relaxation in qualifying marks and lower standards of evaluation for reservation in promotion.
3. Article 243D: Seats in every panchayat are reserved for SCs and STs in proportion to their population; not less than one-third of all seats and of chairperson offices are reserved for women; and a State legislature may reserve seats or chairperson offices for backward classes.

Article 335 is often misread. It names efficiency of administration as a consideration to be balanced with the claims of SCs and STs, and the Supreme Court reads reservation under Article 16(4) together with it, but the article does not define the term.

Legislatures, Lists and Commissions: Articles 330 to 342A

Article 330 reserves seats in the Lok Sabha for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, and Article 332 does the same in every State Legislative Assembly. The number of reserved seats bears, as nearly as may be, the same proportion to the total seats as the population of the group in the State bears to its total population. Reserved constituencies are rotated at each delimitation.

Article 334 originally let these seats lapse after ten years. Extensions came by amendment, and the 104th Amendment, in force from 25 January 2020, fixed the period at eighty years from the commencement of the Constitution, that is, until 25 January 2030, and let the nomination of Anglo-Indian members lapse after seventy years. A further extension needs another amendment.

Who counts as a beneficiary is decided by lists. The President notifies the Scheduled Castes under Article 341 and the Scheduled Tribes under Article 342. Article 340 lets the President appoint a commission to investigate the conditions of backward classes. The 102nd Amendment added Article 342A, under which the President notifies socially and educationally backward classes for the Central List, and Article 366(26C) defines such classes by reference to it. The commissions that watch over these groups sit under Articles 338, 338A and 338B.

Reservation Percentage in India: SC, ST, OBC and EWS

SC and ST Reservation in India: 15 and 7.5 Per Cent

The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe shares follow population. In central government jobs and central institutions 15 per cent is reserved for the Scheduled Castes and 7.5 per cent for the Scheduled Tribes, shares specified in 1982 for vacancies in public sector and government-aided educational institutions as well. In the 2011 census the two groups made up about 16.6 and 8.6 per cent of the population, and the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 lists 1,108 castes across 28 States, while the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 lists 744 tribes across 22 States. The creamy layer exclusion applies only to OBCs; the Union government has told the Supreme Court that it does not apply to SCs and STs.

OBC Reservation: 27 Per Cent and the Central and State Lists

The Other Backward Classes have 27 per cent reservation in central government jobs and central educational institutions. They are communities other than SC and ST that suffer educational and social backwardness. The job quota came from the Mandal recommendations and the education quota from the 93rd Amendment and the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006.

There are two kinds of OBC list. The Central List is notified by the President under Article 342A and applies to Union jobs and institutions. Each State keeps its own list for its own jobs and colleges, and the two may differ, so a community can be OBC in a State and not in the Central List. The number of backward castes in the Central List had risen to 5,013 by 2006, from the 3,743 the Mandal Commission identified.

Sub-categorisation of OBCs is the live issue. In October 2017 the President appointed a five-member commission under Justice G. Rohini under Article 340 to examine it. After 13 extensions it submitted its report to President Droupadi Murmu on 31 July 2023, with an updated list of 2,633 OBC castes.

EWS Reservation: Criteria and Status

EWS reservation gives up to 10 per cent of central government posts and of seats in educational institutions to economically weaker sections who are outside the SC, ST and Central List OBC categories. The 103rd Amendment received assent on 12 January 2019 and came into force on 14 January 2019, adding Articles 15(6) and 16(6). The quota is in addition to the existing reservation.

Article 15(6) leaves the definition to the State, which notifies economically weaker sections on the basis of family income and other indicators. For central jobs the eligibility is a gross annual family income below ₹8 lakh, with further tests on agricultural land and residential property. The amendment enables but does not force the States, and some States set their own criteria.

Reservation in the States: Tamil Nadu, the North-East and Recent Court Rulings

Quotas differ from State to State because each State sets them for its own jobs and colleges. Tamil Nadu has reserved 69 per cent since 1990. Its reservation law for backward classes, SCs and STs (Tamil Nadu Act 45 of 1994) was placed in the Ninth Schedule in 1994, and Article 31B protects Ninth Schedule laws from being declared void for violating fundamental rights. That is how Tamil Nadu kept 69 per cent against the 50 per cent ceiling set in 1992. Maharashtra now provides 10 per cent for the SEBC category created for Marathas, besides other sub-quotas; an earlier 16 per cent Maratha quota was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2021.

Other States tried to cross the ceiling without that protection and met the courts.

• Bihar: The State raised reservation to 65 per cent in 2023, which with the 10 per cent EWS quota made 75 per cent, and the Patna High Court struck down the increase to 65 per cent on 20 June 2024.
• Karnataka: A 2022 Act raised SC reservation from 15 to 17 per cent and ST reservation from 3 to 7 per cent, breaching the 50 per cent cap. Faced with court cases, the State reverted to 15 and 3 per cent in 2026.
• Madhya Pradesh: On 9 October 2026 the High Court struck down a 2019 State law that had raised OBC reservation from 14 to 27 per cent, holding that no extraordinary conditions justified breaching the 50 per cent ceiling.

Landmark Judgments on Reservation: Ceiling, Creamy Layer, Promotion and Sub-classification

Indra Sawhney Case (1992): The Mandal Judgment

The Indra Sawhney case is the foundation of reservation law. The 1990 order giving 27 per cent of central jobs to OBCs was challenged on three grounds. It was said to violate equality of opportunity, caste was said not to be a reliable indicator of backwardness and the efficiency of public institutions was said to be at risk. A nine-judge bench decided the case on 16 November 1992.

• 27 per cent upheld: The OBC quota in central government jobs was valid and caste was an acceptable indicator of backwardness.
• Social backwardness: The Constitution recognises social and educational backwardness, not economic backwardness alone.
• 50 per cent ceiling: Reservation should at no point exceed 50 per cent.
• Creamy layer: The advanced section of a backward class must be excluded from the OBC quota.
• No quota in promotion: Reservation in promotion was held unconstitutional, though existing promotion quotas could continue for five years.
• Permanent body: Governments were told to set up a permanent body to examine inclusion in and exclusion from the OBC lists, which led to the NCBC in 1993.

Each holding started a later chapter. The promotion ruling produced the 77th Amendment, the creamy layer produced the income limit of 1993 and the ceiling became the benchmark against which every later quota, from Tamil Nadu's 69 per cent to the EWS quota, has been judged.

Creamy Layer: Criteria, Income Limit and the 2026 Ruling

The creamy layer means the members of a backward class who are highly advanced socially, economically and educationally, as forward as any member of a forward class. They are kept out of the quota so that its benefit reaches the weaker members. The concept was first introduced in the judiciary by Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer in State of Kerala v. N. M. Thomas and was developed into law in Indra Sawhney (1992); the government's office memorandum of 8 September 1993 then set the criteria.

The excluded groups include children of constitutional office-holders such as the President and judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts, of certain levels of government and public sector employees and of armed forces officers above a certain rank, and families above the income limit for three consecutive years.

The limit stood at ₹8 lakh when the Supreme Court decided Union of India v. Rohith Nathan on 11 March 2026. The Court held that creamy layer status cannot be decided on parental income alone, since the status and category of the parent's post under the 1993 memorandum must be considered, so salary income of parents in public sector undertakings cannot by itself push a child into the creamy layer. On 24 September 2026 the Court reserved orders on the Union's plea to apply the ruling prospectively.

Reservation in Promotion: Nagaraj (2006) and Jarnail Singh (2018 and 2022)

Reservation in promotion is the most litigated part of the system. After Indra Sawhney ruled out quotas in promotion, Parliament restored them step by step.

• 77th Amendment, 1995: Inserted Article 16(4A), allowing reservation in promotion for SCs and STs.
• 81st Amendment, 2000: Inserted Article 16(4B), so that carried-forward vacancies stay outside the 50 per cent ceiling of the year in which they are filled.
• 82nd Amendment, 2000: Added the proviso to Article 335 allowing relaxation in marks and standards.
• 85th Amendment, 2001: Gave consequential seniority to those promoted by reservation, with effect from 17 June 1995.

All these amendments were tested in M. Nagaraj v. Union of India. In 2006 the Supreme Court upheld them as enabling provisions but held that a State wishing to reserve in promotion must collect quantifiable data showing backwardness of the class and inadequacy of its representation in public employment, besides complying with Article 335. Uttar Pradesh's promotion quota of 2007 fell on this requirement; the Supreme Court rejected it in 2012 because the State had not produced valid data.

In Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta (2018) a Constitution Bench, which declined to refer Nagaraj to a seven-judge bench, held that asking for data on backwardness of SCs and STs was contrary to Indra Sawhney, since their social and educational backwardness is presumed, but it kept the requirement of quantifiable data on inadequate representation.

In its 2022 judgment in the same case, the Court held that this data must be collected cadre-wise, taking the cadre as the unit.

EWS and the 50 Per Cent Ceiling: Janhit Abhiyan (2022)

The EWS quota raised two direct questions. Can reservation rest on economic criteria alone, and can it go beyond 50 per cent? In Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India, decided on 7 November 2022, a five-judge bench upheld the 103rd Amendment by 3 to 2.

Justices Dinesh Maheshwari, Bela M. Trivedi and J. B. Pardiwala formed the majority; Justices Uday Umesh Lalit and S. Ravindra Bhat dissented. The majority also held that the 50 per cent ceiling is not inviolable. In practice, reservation in central institutions now stands at 59.5 per cent, and the ceiling of 1992 is no longer an absolute bar.

Sub-classification of SCs and STs: Davinder Singh (2024)

Sub-classification means dividing a reserved category so that its most backward groups get a share of their own. In 1975 Punjab allocated 50 per cent of the reserved SC seats to the Valmiki and Mazhabi Sikh communities. In E. V. Chinnaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2004) a five-judge bench held that the Scheduled Castes in the President's list form a single, homogeneous group that cannot be divided.

In State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh, decided on 1 August 2024, a seven-judge bench headed by Chief Justice D. Y. Chandrachud overruled Chinnaiah by 6 to 1. States may sub-classify SCs and STs under Articles 15 and 16, because the President's power under Article 341 only identifies who is in the list and does not decide how benefits are shared. Any sub-classification must rest on quantifiable, empirical data on the relative backwardness of the sub-group and its inadequate representation in public service. Justice Bela M. Trivedi dissented, holding that States would be tampering with the Presidential list.

Justice B. R. Gavai added in his own opinion that the creamy layer concept used for OBCs should be applied to SCs and STs as well. In 2026 the Union government opposed this in the Supreme Court, arguing that the principles of creamy layer are not applicable to SCs and STs, and that any income-based preference within reserved categories should follow a holistic review and empirical study.

States have begun to act. In 2026 Karnataka announced a matrix dividing its 15 per cent SC reservation as 5.25 per cent each for two categories and 4.5 per cent for a third, the second formula the State has tried after an earlier division within 17 per cent.

Reservation for Women: Local Bodies to Parliament

Women in Panchayats and Municipalities: Articles 243D and 243T

Reservation for women began with local government. The 73rd and 74th Amendments reserved one-third of all directly elected seats in panchayats and municipalities for women, counting the seats of SC and ST women within that share, and in panchayats one-third of the offices of chairperson. Under Article 243D(3) the one-third is of the total seats filled by direct election.

The reservation has brought a large number of women into office. There are more than 80,000 women Sarpanchas in Gram Panchayats, although some women have been unable to assert their presence or are proxies for male relatives. Women are not a minority and do not form a single backward class, so their quota rests on Article 15(3) and on the special provisions of Part IX and Part XVI, and not on Article 15(4).

The 106th Amendment: Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam, Commencement and Status

The Constitution (106th Amendment) Act, 2023, called the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam, was passed by the Lok Sabha on 20 September 2023 with 454 votes for and 2 against, and by the Rajya Sabha on 21 September 2023 unanimously with 214 votes. It inserted Articles 330A and 332A, which reserve, as nearly as may be, one-third of the seats filled by direct election in the Lok Sabha, the State Assemblies and the Delhi Assembly for women, including one-third of the SC and ST seats for women of those groups. It does not apply to the Rajya Sabha or the State Legislative Councils.

The Act came into force on 16 April 2026 under a notification of that date. The reservation of seats does not operate yet. Under Article 334A it takes effect after a delimitation undertaken on the first census published after the Act's commencement, rotates after each later delimitation, and ceases fifteen years from commencement. A bid to speed this up failed on 17 April 2026, when the Lok Sabha defeated the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026, which sought to enlarge the House and use the 2011 census for delimitation. It received 298 votes for and 230 against, short of the 352 needed. The government then withdrew the linked Delimitation Bill and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill.

Institutions That Protect Reservation: NCSC, NCST and NCBC

National Commission for Backward Classes: From Statutory to Constitutional Body

The National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) began as a statutory body set up in 1993 under the NCBC Act, following the direction in Indra Sawhney. Its job was to examine requests for inclusion in the Central List of OBCs and complaints of over-inclusion or under-inclusion, and to advise the government. It could not hear grievances of OBCs; under Article 338(5) read with 338(10), the National Commission for Scheduled Castes was the authority for those.

The 102nd Amendment of 2018 made the NCBC a constitutional body under Article 338B and added Article 342A. Its role widened in four ways.

• Safeguards: It investigates and monitors all safeguards for the socially and educationally backward classes and evaluates how they work.
• Complaints: It inquires into specific complaints about the deprivation of their rights and safeguards.
• Advice on development: It takes part in planning their socio-economic development and reports to the President every year.
• Consultation: The Union and every State must consult it on major policy matters affecting these classes.

The amendment then caused a problem. In the Maratha reservation case (Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil v. Chief Minister, Maharashtra) of May 2021, a 3 to 2 majority of the Supreme Court read the 102nd Amendment as taking away the States' power to recognise socially and educationally backward classes. Parliament passed the 105th Amendment, which received assent on 18 August 2021, restoring the power of States to keep their own lists, which may differ from the Central List.

NCSC and NCST: Powers and Limits of Enforcement

The National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC, Article 338) and the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST, Article 338A) guard the safeguards of these communities, including reservation. A single commission was created by the 65th Amendment in 1990 and split in two by the 89th Amendment; the NCST was set up on 19 February 2004. Each has a Chairperson, a Vice-Chairperson and three other Members.

• What they can do: Investigate and monitor safeguards, inquire into complaints, advise on development planning and report to the President.
• Their strongest power: While inquiring into a complaint, they have the powers of a civil court, such as summoning persons and requiring documents.
• Where they stop: Their reports go to the President, who lays them before Parliament with a memorandum on the action taken and the reasons for not accepting any recommendation. The recommendations are not binding.
• Policy consultation: The Union and the States must consult them on major policy matters affecting SCs and STs.

These limits decide a practical question. The NCSC cannot enforce reservation for Scheduled Castes in religious minority institutions, first because Article 15(5) itself excludes minority educational institutions from the admission quota and second because the Commission can investigate and recommend but cannot compel.

Arguments For and Against Reservation, and the Way Forward

Why Reservation Is Important in India

Equal rules applied to unequal starting points keep old hierarchies in place, so reservation is intended to give excluded groups a real chance. Reservation is the clearest example of how the liberalism of the Indian Constitution has always been linked to social justice.

• Substantive equality: Treating unequal people as equals ignores the head start some have.
• Representation: Quotas in legislatures and services put SC, ST and OBC voices where decisions are made.
• Social mobility: Reservation has helped build an educated middle class among tribal communities, especially in the North-East.

Criticisms of Reservation: Capture, Data and Agitations

Reservation has also drawn sustained criticism, both of the principle and of how it works.

• Capture by the better-off: Benefits are often cornered by a few advanced castes within each category. The creamy layer and sub-classification try to correct this.
• Old data: The Mandal estimate of OBCs rested on the 1931 census; caste is to be counted again in the Census 2027.
• Caste consciousness: Critics argue that using caste as the unit of benefit keeps caste identity alive; for the Dalit communities that depend on this lifeline, caste tends to become the all-important aspect of identity.
• Demands for inclusion: Dominant communities have agitated for backward status, among them the Jats in Haryana in 2016, the Patidars in Gujarat from 2015 and the Marathas in Maharashtra, whose earlier 16 per cent SEBC quota the Supreme Court struck down in 2021.
• A limited base: Job reservation applies to State employment, so the private sector lies outside it.

Making Reservation Reach the Underprivileged: Way Forward

The full benefit of reservation has not yet reached all the underprivileged. The design is sound, but benefits are unevenly spread, data is thin and the bodies that watch over it can only recommend.

• Better targeting: Sub-classification of SCs, STs and OBCs on quantifiable data, as Davinder Singh allows and the Rohini Commission examined for OBCs.
• Reviewing the creamy layer: Keeping the OBC limit and its application consistent, as the Rohith Nathan ruling shows the rules are still being clarified.
• Filling vacancies: Clearing reserved backlog posts, which Article 16(4B) already carries forward.
• Reliable data: Regular data on representation of each group in each service, which courts require before promotion quotas.
• Beyond quotas: School education, scholarships and skills, so that more people from reserved groups can compete for the seats.

Sources

• Legislative Department: The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024)
• Gazette of India: S.O. 1922(E) of 16 April 2026, commencement of the Constitution (106th Amendment) Act
• Supreme Court of India: Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta, judgment of 28 January 2022
• National Commission for Scheduled Castes: Functions of NCSC
• NCERT: Indian Constitution at Work, Class XI, Rights
• NCERT: Indian Constitution at Work, Class XI, Election and Representation
• NCERT: Indian Constitution at Work, Class XI, Local Governments
• NCERT: Indian Constitution at Work, Class XI, Constitution as a Living Document
• NCERT: Indian Constitution at Work, Class XI, The Philosophy of the Constitution
• NCERT: Politics in India since Independence, Class XII, Recent Developments
• NCERT: Indian Society, Class XII, Social Institutions
• The Hindu (Delhi): Supreme Court: OBC creamy layer cannot rest on parental income alone, 13 March 2026
• The Hindu (Delhi): Supreme Court reserves orders on prospective effect of the creamy layer ruling, 25 September 2026
• The Hindu (Delhi): Union opposes a creamy layer for SCs and STs in the Supreme Court, 7 August 2026
• The Hindu (Delhi): The creamy layer debate for SCs and STs, 16 August 2026
• The Hindu (Delhi): Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam comes into force, 14 April 2026
• The Hindu (Delhi): Lok Sabha defeats the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 18 April 2026
• The Hindu (Delhi): Karnataka announces a new matrix for internal reservation among SCs, 25 April 2026
• The Hindu (Delhi): Karnataka's reservation quantum and the High Court cases, 13 May 2026
• The Hindu (Delhi): Madhya Pradesh High Court strikes down the 27 per cent OBC quota law, 10 October 2026
• Wikipedia: Reservation in India
• Wikipedia: Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India
• Wikipedia: Mandal Commission
• Wikipedia: Creamy layer
• Wikipedia: Economically Weaker Section
• Wikipedia: Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India
• Wikipedia: State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh
• Wikipedia: One Hundred and Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of India
• Wikipedia: Women's Reservation Bill
• Wikipedia: Poona Pact
• Wikipedia: Shahu of Kolhapur
• Wikipedia: Reservation policy in Tamil Nadu
• Wikipedia: Reservation policy in Bihar
• Wikipedia: G. Rohini
• Wikipedia: National Commission for Backward Classes
• Wikipedia: National Commission for Scheduled Castes
• Wikipedia: National Commission for Scheduled Tribes
• Wikipedia: State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan
• Wikipedia: Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India
• Wikipedia: Ninth Schedule to the Constitution of India
• UPSC: Civil Services Examination question papers