On 12th April 2023, the Supreme Court announced that on 11th July 2023, it would hear arguments on whether and to what degree Commission recommendations that are not approved by the government may be relied on, as well as whether the caste system can be attributed to Islam or Christianity, given their form and character. These problems will be addressed by the Court in a group of petitions contesting the exclusion of Christians and Muslims from the Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950.
Following a brief hearing, the Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, and Aravind Kumar pronounced their decision, noting that the plaintiffs claim that waiting for the newest Commission’s report will be an endless activity and that the matter will never see the light of day. The Court agreed with their contention that the documentation on record is adequate to proceed with the hearing.
Additional Solicitor General K Nataraj appeared for the union government while advocate Prashant Bhushan, senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, and senior advocate CU Singh argued for the petitioners. The Court acknowledged the ASG’s view that the Court should await the findings of the Panel chaired by Judge KG Balakrishnan.
The court also recognised that the counsel opposing the petition on behalf of plaintiffs has also pursued to raise issues regarding the nature and character of the two religions Islam and Christianity and whether the caste system can be attributed to Christian and Muslim religious faiths by prolonging reservation post-conversion. The Court noted that it will also evaluate the consequences of a Commission’s report that has been dismissed by the government. If the empirical data in the report can be accepted.
The Court instructed listing on the matters on the regular board on 11 July for directives. The Court appointed nodal counsel on both sides and ordered the submission of convenience compilations. AoR Nachiketa Joshi is the nodal Lawyer on behalf of the respondents.
The petitioners urged to uphold the report of the Justice Ranganath Mishra commission
When the matter was summoned, Attorney Prashant Bhushan representing the petitioner contended that it is a purely legal and constitutional question as to whether the state may discriminate on the basis of faith. He said that the Ranganath Misra Commission investigated the matter and determined that it is discriminatory. He stated that the Centre has now said that they have rejected the report.
The matter, according to Assistant Solicitor General K. Nataraj, can only be decided based on the data that would be obtained. Justice Kaul asked, “There is no difficulty in examining the constitutional position. What will be the status of the Ranganath Misra Commission report? How do we rely on a report that has not been accepted by the centre? If a report is not accepted, what is the status of the finding or empirical data? Can we accept the imperial data from a report is not accepted?”
He further said, “To what extent can a report not accepted by the government be relied upon? What is the structure of the religions, do they recognise the caste system and what is the effect of it? There are reports to this effect that the problem is not wished away by conversion.”
The case is 20 years old
The writ plea submitted in 2004 contests the exclusion of Christians and Muslims from the Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order 1950, claiming that the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order 1950, as periodically modified, is discriminative and violates Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution by differentiating against Scheduled Caste converts to religions other than Hinduism, Sikhism, and Buddhism.
The Supreme Court had adjourned the set of petitions on the prior day of the hearing to decide whether or not to await the findings of the newly established Commission led by former Chief Justice K. G. Balakrishnan. In its 2007 report, the former Justice Ranganath Misra Committee supported the extension of reservation entitlements to converted Dalits.
The plaintiffs before the Court argued that the social and economic disabilities of Scheduled Castes who convert to Christianity persist in the majority of cases even after their conversion and that there can be no distinction in this regard between Scheduled Castes who convert to Sikh and Buddhist religions and Scheduled Castes who convert to Christianity.
According to the Central Government’s Counter Affidavit opposing the plea, Christianity is an egalitarian religion that does not acknowledge caste. It indicates that the criteria used to determine whether a caste or group is suitable for inclusion in the Scheduled Caste list include immense social, educational, and economic backwardness resulting from ancient untouchability practises practised by Hindus centuries ago. According to the Center, ST converted to Christianity cannot be compared to SC converted to Christianity.
What is the Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order 1950?
According to the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, no one who practises a faith other than Hinduism, Sikhism, or Buddhism can be a member of a Scheduled Caste. On January 23, 2023, the Supreme Court refused to hear a petition contesting the Centre’s 2022 move to appoint a committee chaired by former CJI KG Balakrishnan to investigate the provision of scheduled caste status to Dalits who converted to Christianity or Islam.
