THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. versus DAVINDER SINGH & ORS.
[2024] 8 S.C.R. 1321, Supreme Court of India, 2024
Outcome: Reference answered
Segment: Issues
1668
[2024] 8 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
reserved category of persons under the constitution. Each concession 
once made, just goes on swelling like a raisin/balloon. This actually 
happened with the policy of reservation also. 
RESERVATION IS ONLY A MEDIUM OF FACILITY BUT ITS 
EXECUTION REVIVES CASTEISM 
72.	 ‘Reservation’ is one of the modes of helping or uplifting the status of 
the OBCs/SCs/STs. Anyone who suggests another or a better way of 
helping the so-called depressed classes or the downtrodden or the 
marginalised persons of the society is immediately pounced upon 
as ‘Anti Dalit’. At the cost of being called ‘Anti Dalit’, I quote Nani 
A Palkiwala from his book ‘We, The Nation, The Lost Decades)21
“The basic structure of the Constitution envisages a 
cohesive, unified, casteless society. By breathing new 
life into casteism, the judgment fractures the nation and 
disregards the basic structure of the Constitution. The 
decision would revitalise casteism, cleave the nation into 
two – forward and backward - and open new vistas for 
internecine conflicts and fissiparous forces, and make 
backwardness a vested interest. It will undo whatever 
has been achieved since independence towards creating 
a unified, integrated nation. The majority judgments will 
revive casteism which the Constitution emphatically 
intended to end; and the pre-independence tragedy would 
be re-enacted with the roles reversed – the erstwhile 
underprivileged would not become the
privileged.”
73.	 In fact, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other backward 
classes simply deserve equality with the other forward classes of 
people. Justice O. Chinnappa Reddy in K C Vasantha Kumar & 
Anr. vs. State of Karnataka22 said “they need facility; they need 
launching; they need propulsion. Their needs are their demands. 
The demands are matters of rights and not of philanthrophy. They 
ask for parity and not charity.” 
74.	 In State of Kerala vs. N M Thomas,23 Justice V R Krishna Ayer 
said “you can’t throw to the winds considerations of administrative 
21	
NANI PALKIWALA, WE, THE NATION: THE LOST DECADES 179 (Mehta Publishing House 1995)
22	
[1985] Supp. 1 SCR 352 : (1985) Supp. SCC 714 
23	
[1976] 1 SCR 906 : (1976) 2 SCC 310
[2024] 8 S.C.R. 
1669
The State of Punjab & Ors. v. Davinder Singh & Ors. 
capability and grind the wheels of Government to a hault in the name 
of ‘harijan welfare’.”
75.	 This Court in A. Periakaruppan Chettiar vs. State of Tamil Nadu & 
Ors.24 observed that reservations should not be allowed to become 
a vested interest. In Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karamchari Sangh 
vs. Union of India & Ors.25 it was observed that efficacy of the 
reservation policy will depend upon how soon reservations can be 
done away with. The then Chief Justice of India Y.V. Chandrachud 
counselled in Vasanth Kumar (supra), “the policy of reservation in 
employment, education and legislative institutions should be reviewed 
every five years or so.” 
76.	 Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru in his letter dated 27th June 1961 addressed 
to all the Chief Ministers of all the States laments upon the habit of 
giving reservations and privileges to any caste or group and expresses 
that such practice ought to be given up and emphasis to help the 
citizens on economic considerations and not on caste basis and 
that the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes do deserve help 
but not in the shape of any kind of reservation more particularly in 
services. He wrote: 
“I want my country to be a first-class country in everything. 
The moment we encourage the second-rate, we are lost. 
The only real way to help a backward group is to give 
opportunities of good education, this includes technical 
education which is becoming
more and more important. 
Everything else is a provision of some kind of crutches 
which do not add to the strength or health of the body.”
In the same letter he went on to speak about two very important 
decisions, “one is, universal free elementary education that is 
the base; and the second is scholarship on a very wide scale 
at every grade of education to the bright boys and girls”. He 
went on to express if reservation on communal and caste basis 
continues, India will remain second rate or third rate. He said 
“This way lies not only folly, but disaster. Let us help the backward 
groups by all means, but never at the cost of efficiency.”
24	
(1971) 1 SCC 38
25	
[1981] 2 SCR 185 : (1981) 1 SCC 246
1670
[2024] 8 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
CONCLUSION
77.	 Our predecessors, not only the Judges but also the former Prime 
Minister have appeared to be against providing reservation to any 
class or caste of persons on purely caste basis and wanted to take 
the country forward on merit basis. Despite the views so expressed, 
the Constitutional amendments envisaged to promote the depressed 
and the backward classes of persons to bring them to the level of 
the privileged class enjoying the status of an urban elite. Thus, the 
reservation policy was rightly applied and since its implementation faced 
difficulties as some in the backward classes have marched ahead, it 
has become imperative to uplift the backward of the backwards, for 
which purpose sub-classification has become the order of the day. 
78.	 I had the privilege of going through the erudite judgments of the 
Chief Justice and my esteemed brother Justice Gavai.
79.	 The Chief Justice in his opinion has dwelled upon the legal aspects 
to answer the core issue whether sub-classification of the scheduled 
castes is constitutionally permissible for the purposes of reservation. 
He has clearly opined that this Court in Indra Sawhney (Supra) 
never intended to limit the application of sub-classification to the 
other backward classes only. If any class is not integrated it can be 
further classified and such sub-classification of a class would not be 
violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, so long persons
in a class 
are not similarly situated. There is no violation of Article 341(2) of 
the Constitution in sub-classification within the scheduled caste as 
by such sub-classification no caste is being included or excluded 
from the list of scheduled castes.
80.	 His Lordship Justice Gavai in his opinion quoted an example where 
a member of a backward class becomes an IAS or an IPS or any 
other officer of the All India Service and improves upon his status in 
the society but even then his children get full benefits of reservation. 
No doubt, “one swallow does not make a summer” meaning thereby 
that if few members of a particular caste/class advances in the 
society the entire caste or class would not cease to be backward. 
Nonetheless if any member of designated backward class acquires a 
higher status and attains equality with the forward class, it is difficult 
to comprehend how his children would be treated as depressed, 
downtrodden or backward in any manner be it socially, economically 
or educationally. Therefore, the caste to which this person belongs 
may not be excluded as a whole from the benefit of reservation but
[2024] 8 S.C.R. 
1671
The State of Punjab & Ors. v. Davinder Singh & Ors. 
certainly the family which has obtained the benefit once shall not be 
allowed to take advantage of reservation in the next generation. The 
reservation to such families has to be confined to one generation only.
81.	 It has rightly been stated by my brother Justice Gavai in his opinion 
that Justice Krishna Iyer in N. M. Thomas (supra) has repeatedly 
observed that State is entitled to take steps for weeding out socially, 
economically and educationally advanced sections of scheduled 
castes and scheduled tribes from the ambit of reservation.
82.	 It has rightly been observed that a child studying in St. Stephen’s 
College or any good urban college cannot be equated with a child 
studying in a rural school/college and that he cannot be grouped 
into a same bracket.
83.	 In these circumstances my brother Justice Gavai has rightly concluded 
that the State must evolve a policy of identifying the creamy layer 
even from the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes so as to 
exclude them from the benefit of reservation.
84.	 Agreeing with the scholarly separate opinions authored by the Chief 
Justice and Brother Gavai, J., I summarise my views as under:
(i)	
The policy of reservation as enshrined under the Constitution 
and by its various amendments requires a fresh re-look and 
evolvement of other methods for helping and uplifting the 
depressed class or the downtrodden or the persons belonging 
to
SC/ST/OBC communities. So long no new method is evolved 
or adopted, the system of reservation as prevailing may continue 
to occupy the field with power to permit sub-classification of a 
class particularly scheduled caste as I would not be suggesting 
dismantling of an existing building without erecting a new one 
in its place which may prove to be more useful;
(ii)	
In the Constitutional regime, there is no caste system and 
the country has moved into a casteless society except for 
the deeming provision under the Constitution for the limited 
purposes of affording reservation to the depressed class of 
persons, downtrodden or belonging to SC/ST/OBC. Therefore, 
any facility or privilege for the promotion of the above categories 
of persons has to be on a totally different criteria other than the 
caste may be on economic or financial factors, status of living, 
vocation and the facilities available to each one of them based 
upon their place of living (urban or rural);
1672
[2024] 8 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
(iii)	 The reservation, if any, has to be limited only for the first 
generation or one generation and if any generation in the family 
has taken advantage of the reservation and have achieved 
higher status, the benefit of reservation would not be logically 
available to the second generation; and 
(iv)	 It is reiterated that periodical exercise has to be undertaken 
to exclude the class of person who after taking advantage of 
reservation has come to march, shoulder to shoulder with the 
general category.
85.	 The reference is accordingly answered and it is held that sub-
classification of scheduled castes is permissible in law for the 
purposes of reservation.
Satish Chandra Sharma, J.
1.	
I have had the privilege of reading the lucid and detailed opinion(s) 
authored by Hon’ble Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Chief Justice 
of India and Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.R. Gavai, respectively. I am fully 
in agreement with both opinions to the extent that the validity of 
sub-classification within Scheduled Castes has been held to be 
constitutionally permissible. Moreover, I am fully in agreement with the 
opinion(s) to the extent that any exercise involving sub-classification 
by the State, must be supported by empirical data that ought to 
underscore the more ‘disadvantaged’ status of the sub-group to 
which such preferential treatment is sought to be provided vis-à-vis 
the Constitutional Class as a whole.
2.	
However, on the
question of applicability of the ‘creamy layer principle’ 
to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, I find myself in agreement 
with the view expressed by Justice Gavai i.e., for the full realisation 
of substantive equality inter se the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled 
Tribes, the identification of the ‘creamy layer’ qua Scheduled Castes 
and Scheduled Tribes ought to become a constitutional imperative 
for the State.
Result of the case: Reference answered.
†Headnotes prepared by: Bibhuti Bhushan Bose