Supreme Court Grants Relief To 60 UPSC Candidates In OBC Creamy Layer Dispute

In a significant ruling on reservation policy, the Supreme Court has granted relief to nearly 60 UPSC candidates who had cleared the Civil Services Examination in 2016 but were denied appointment after being classified under the OBC creamy layer. The Court clarified that creamy layer status cannot be determined solely based on parental income.

The decision came from a Bench of Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice R. Mahadevan while dismissing appeals filed by the Union government against several High Court judgments that had ruled in favour of the candidates.

These candidates had qualified the UPSC Civil Services Examination in 2016 under the OBC category. However, the Department of Personnel and Training refused to grant them appointments after treating them as part of the creamy layer based only on their parents’ salaries.

The Court observed that relying solely on income to determine creamy layer status is legally incorrect. It stated that the original 1993 guidelines require authorities to also examine the nature of the parents’ employment, their position, and their social status.

In the judgement authored by Justice Mahadevan, the Court explained that the concept of creamy layer exists to ensure that the benefits of reservation reach genuinely backward sections within the OBC community. The objective is to prevent socially advanced individuals within the same community from monopolising these benefits.

The Bench further clarified that government employees in Group C and Group D positions cannot automatically be excluded from reservation benefits merely because their salaries increase over time. Such exclusion would be inconsistent with the principle of equality guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

The Court stressed that reservation policies must avoid creating artificial distinctions among people belonging to the same social category. While caste may historically indicate social backwardness, it cannot be treated as the only factor determining backward status.

At the same time, the Court reiterated that excluding the creamy layer from reservation benefits is not merely a matter of policy preference but a constitutional requirement. The purpose is to ensure that reservation benefits reach those who are truly socially and educationally disadvantaged.

The Supreme Court has now directed the Central government to reconsider the claims of the affected candidates in accordance with the principles laid down in the judgement. Authorities have been asked to reassess their eligibility without including income derived from the parents’ government employment while applying the creamy layer test.

Importantly, the Court also permitted the government to create additional posts if necessary to accommodate the affected candidates. The entire exercise must be completed within six months.

The dispute had earlier travelled through the Central Administrative Tribunal and multiple High Courts, including the Delhi, Kerala, and Madras High Courts, all of which had ruled in favour of the candidates.

The ruling reinforces that creamy layer determination under OBC reservation cannot rely solely on income thresholds and must take into account broader social and occupational factors.