AIR 2000 SUPREME COURT 498 ::1999 AIR SCW 4661 ::2000 LAB. I. C. 277 ::2000 (1) UJ (SC) 367 ::2000 UJ(SC) 1 367 ::2000 (1) SCC 168 ::2000 SCC (L&S) 1 ::(1999) 7 Scale 411 ::2000 (3) ServLJ 101 SC ::2000 (1) SCT 1094 ::1999 (6) ServLR 1 ::2000 (1) LRI 390 ::(2000) 1 UPLBEC 455 ::1999 (10) Supreme 270 ::2000 (1) Andh LD 54 ::2000 (1) SRJ 304 ::(1999) 9 JT 557 (SC) ::1999 (9) JT 557

Supreme Court Of India

Hon'ble Judge(s): M. Jagannadha Rao, D. P. Wadhwa, M. B. Shah , JJJ

(A) Constitution of India , Art.16(4)— Reservation benefits - 'Creamy layer' within backward class - To be excluded - Identification and exclusion of creamy layer in every backward class - Judgment given in Indra Sawhney's case 1992 AIR SCW 3682 : AIR 1993 SC 477 : 1998 Lab IC 129 in this behalf - Is declaration of law and not mere illustrations - Further, broad categorisation of persons falling outside creamy layer enumerated in notification of Central Govt. dt. 8-9-93, is valid - Directions are given in Indra Sawhney's case (1992 AIR SCW 3682 : AIR 1993 SC 477 : 1993 Lab IC 129) to Central and State Govt. to identify and notify the creamy layer. Caste only cannot be the basis for reservation. Reservation can be for a backward class citizen of a particular caste. Therefore, from that caste, creamy layer and non-backward class of citizens are to be excluded. If the caste is to be taken into consideration then for finding out socially and economically backward class, creamy layer of the caste is to be eliminated for granting benefit of reservation, because the creamy layer cannot be termed as socially and economically backward. @page-SC499 These questions are exhaustively dealt with by a nine Judge Bench of this Court in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, (1992 AIR SCW 3682 : AIR 1993 SC 477 : 1993 Lab IC 129) and it has been speci....