LOADING...
Supreme Court questions reservation for children of well-off parents
The court was hearing a plea

Supreme Court questions reservation for children of well-off parents

May 23, 2026
11:35 am

What's the story

The Supreme Court has questioned the continued reservation benefits for children of economically and educationally advanced families within backward classes. The court was hearing a plea challenging a Karnataka High Court judgment that excluded a petitioner from reservation benefits. The exclusion was based on the income of his parents, both government employees, which exceeded the creamy layer threshold.

Court's observation

Seeking reservations for empowered kids counterproductive, says court

The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, questioned why reservations are needed for children of well-off families. "If both parents are IAS officers, why should they have reservations?" the court asked. The bench emphasized that social mobility comes with educational and economic empowerment, adding that seeking reservations for children of empowered parents is counterproductive.

Caste certificate revoked

Petitioner selected as assistant engineer under reserved category

The petitioner, who was selected as an assistant engineer in Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited under the reserved category, was denied a caste validity certificate. The District Caste and Income Verification Committee found him to be part of the creamy layer based on his parents' income. His caste certificate for the Kuruba community was subsequently revoked due to their combined income exceeding ₹8,00,000.

Advertisement

Reservation debate

SC's previous ruling on exclusion of IAS, IPS children

The Supreme Court had earlier refused to entertain a plea seeking the exclusion of children of IAS and IPS officers from SC and ST quotas in Madhya Pradesh. The court pointed out that the reference to the exclusion of the creamy layer from SC and ST quotas in a seven-judge Constitution Bench's August 2024 ruling in the State of Punjab versus the Davinder Singh case was only a view and that it was the legislature that had to decide.

Advertisement