Supreme Court government workers' body opposes adding Dalit Christians or Muslims to Scheduled Caste list
The Dr. Ambedkar Anusuchit Jati Adhikari Karmchari Manch (AJAK), based in Jaipur, has written to the Chairperson of the Commission, former Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan, saying that they 'strongly oppose adding new groups, like Dalit Christians or Muslim, to the SC list'.
The organisation, which represents government servants – both serving and retired, requested the Commission for a meeting in this regard, saying that it hoped the Commission would stand with it to protect the interests, rights, and benefits of existing Scheduled Caste communities in the country.
It said, 'From time to time, the State governments and Central government have been disrespecting and violating the Constitution of India for their political gains and have been changing the list of Scheduled Castes to serve their political interests.'
Shriram Choradiya, President of AJAK, Rajasthan, told The Hindu that such changes to the SC list might lead to 'Manipur-like' situations in parts of the country, adding that the government's 'ulterior motive' is to divide SC people. In the letter, AJAK also referenced the addition of communities to the SC list in Uttarakhand as sub-castes, by the State government, in 2013 and 2014, arguing this is violative of Article 341, which gives only Parliament the power to modify the list.
In the letter, AJAK said, 'We fear that adding new groups, like Dalit Christians or Muslims, to the SC list without strict checks will harm our rights and benefits.'
Mr. Choradiya added, 'We understand that caste discrimination does not stop even after changing one's religion. But that should not be a cause to keep fiddling with the SC list. If they need to be protected, then let the government come up with a new category like they did for OBCs or even EWS category.'
The Justice K.G. Balakrishnan-led Commission was constituted by the Union Social Justice Ministry in October 2022. It was instructed to assess if Christians and Muslims, who have historically belonged to SC communities, could be added to the SC list. Dalit Christians and Muslims have for decades now argued that changing their religion had not put an end to caste discrimination and have been demanding SC status. The Supreme Court has been hearing this issue for over 20 years now.
Currently, only communities that practice Hinduism, Buddhism, and Sikhism are permitted to be categorised as SC.
Initially given two years to submit a report, the Commission's tenure was extended in October 2024. It is now expected to submit its report on the issue by October this year.
The Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led Union government has made its position on the issue clear — both to the Commission of Inquiry and to the Supreme Court. Its argument has been that it was justified to exclude Dalit Christians and Muslims from the SC list, alluding to the 'foreign origins' of Islam and Christianity.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
7 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
‘Train SC filmmakers': Adoor's remark sparks row
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Director Adoor Gopalakrishnan's remarks over extending financial support to Scheduled Caste (SC) and women filmmakers sparked a controversy at the closing ceremony of the Kerala Film Policy Conclave in Thiruvananthapuram on Sunday. Speaking at the event, Adoor criticised the Kerala State Film Development Corporation (KSFDC) for providing what he termed excessive funding to directors from the SC community. 'Those from SC backgrounds should be given at least three months of training under experienced filmmakers before being supported. The `1.5-crore grant should be split among three people, rather than funding one project. Government money shouldn't be used just because the film has a superstar or simply because the director is a woman,' Adoor said. Further, he claimed that many of the films funded under the initiative lacked quality and artistic value. Minister for Cultural Affairs Saji Cherian, while presenting a report on the two-day conclave, rebutted Adoor's statements. He said the filmmakers were selected by an expert committee based on merit and their work reflects deep social and creative commitment. 'The fact is that people from the SC communities were kept out of mainstream cinema for nearly a century. The government's decision to support them is both timely and essential. This is the first time many of them are getting to direct a film. We have also taken steps to empower women and recognise transgender artists,' the minister said. The government will not backtrack on its inclusive film policy, he stressed. 'This is a conscious decision to correct historical imbalances. We will continue to provide support,' he said.
News18
30 minutes ago
- News18
'Don't Give Money..': Noted Filmmaker Questions Fee Given To Women, SC & ST Filmmakers; Sparks Row
Last Updated: Adoor said that women filmmaker shouldn't get money only because they are women, adding that they must also be given training. Adoor Gopalakrishnan, the renowned filmmaker sparked a row after he said that women shouldn't be given money to make films just because they are women. His remark on state funding for women and SC/ST filmmakers came at the Kerala Film Conclave. His remarks drew strong reactions from Kerala's Cultural Affairs Minister, Saji Cherian. Speaking at the event, Adoor questioned the current model of financial support being extended to filmmakers from Scheduled Caste (SC), Scheduled Tribe (ST), and women communities through the Kerala State Film Development Corporation (KSFDC). 'The government is giving around Rs 1.5 crore to individuals from SC/ST communities. I once told the Chief Minister that this could open up space for corruption," Adoor said. He added that while the intent behind such schemes is positive, proper groundwork was lacking. 'I want to give a suggestion — those selected should be given intensive training, at least for three months, on how films are made. Just having an interest isn't enough. They should understand budgeting and filmmaking. This is public money — tax money — and must be used responsibly. Instead of giving Rs 1 crore to one person, it should be split into Rs 50 lakh each for three people," he added. His remarks were met with immediate criticism. Pushpavathi PR, Vice Chairperson of the Kerala Sangeetha Nataka Akademi, responded by defending the support extended to women and transgender filmmakers as well. 'People from SC/ST communities have not had the opportunity to come to the forefront of cinema. It's been 98 years — that's the reality," said Minister Cherian. 'One of the best decisions taken by this government was to provide Rs 1.5 crore each for two films. We've already released four and are funding two more." 'How many women in our state have directed films? We gave Rs 1.5 crore each for two women-led films and completed three to four projects. We've also launched initiatives for the transgender community. Everyone should have the opportunity to be part of cinema." Responding to concerns about misuse, Cherian said, 'These decisions are not made arbitrarily. A screening committee of respected members from the Malayalam film industry evaluates each project. And the films produced under this scheme have been extraordinary. We are 100 per cent confident that we made the right decision." view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Deccan Herald
37 minutes ago
- Deccan Herald
Majoritarian project sees a backdoor opening
With the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020, two of the most controversial legal instruments in India's recent history—the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA)—appeared to fade from public country's attention, quite rightly, shifted to healthcare collapse and economic despair. Yet, the ideology underpinning these exclusionary measures, deeply embedded in the Hindutva vision of the BJP and the Sangh Parivar, has not it has returned in more insidious forms, cloaked in bureaucratic and, ostensibly, neutral exercises that now threaten to upend the very idea of citizenship and belonging in NRC-CAA duo marked a dangerous shift in Indian constitutional jurisprudence. For the first time, religion was introduced as a determinant of citizenship under the CAA, undermining the secular bedrock of the Indian tandem, the NRC sought to place the burden of proof for citizenship on individuals, many of whom lack comprehensive documentation due to poverty, displacement or illiteracy. The result was a system that placed millions, especially Muslims, at risk of being rendered stateless in their own the pandemic momentarily stalled this communal citizenship reconfiguration, the Indian state appears to have since adopted more indirect, yet equally damaging, methods to pursue the same Assam, mass eviction drives have disproportionately targeted Bengali-origin Muslims, particularly Miya Muslims, who are long-standing residents but are nevertheless branded 'illegal encroachers'. In Bihar, the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls has quietly transformed a routine democratic exercise into a de facto NRC—one lacking legal Bihar SIR, ostensibly a voter roll 'clean-up', has created an onerous documentation burden that risks disenfranchising vast numbers of poor, migrant and Muslim shift from self-declaration—previously accepted under electoral regulations and by the Supreme Court—to stringent documentation verification marks a dangerous new normal. This shift is not a mere bureaucratic reform; it is a reconstitution of who is allowed to participate in India's consequences are grave. With migrants constituting nearly 20% of Bihar's population, and the poor often lacking stable documentary records, large swathes of the electorate may find themselves arbitrarily analysis by shows that Muslim-dominant areas trail in filling enumeration forms; six of the state's 10 districts with the biggest share of Muslim population also have the highest number of pending forms. What we are witnessing is demographic engineering by stealth—a subtler, paper-based gerrymandering that disempowers the most vulnerable in society under the guise of procedural implications, however, go far beyond Bihar. Officials have hinted that similar 'revisions' are planned in other states, including Assam, West Bengal, and Tamil Nadu, creating a template for exclusion with nationwide Assam has seen a brutal acceleration of state-led evictions, largely targeting Muslim families who have occupied land for government justifies these actions by invoking claims of encroachment on 'government land', but such claims ignore the constitutional and legal protections for shelter and notion that land ownership is proven solely through paperwork discounts the historical and social realities of settlement, especially in a state repeatedly battered by river erosion and displacement. That bulldozers arrive without adequate notice or avenues for legal redress makes a mockery of due 2021 Darrang eviction, where police fired upon unarmed, landless peasants, including a child, remains etched in public memory as a chilling reminder of the state's capacity for violence in the name of evictions in Uriamghat, displacing over 1,400 Muslim families and razing settled neighbourhoods, reflect the same disregard for human are not isolated administrative actions—they are part of a systematic policy of de-citizenisation and the selective use of state machinery to harass Muslim communities—whether through arbitrary evictions, arrest campaigns in the name of child marriage, or coercive documentation exercises—shows a pattern of governance designed to exclude. This aligns seamlessly with the BJP's larger political playbook, which includes the CAA, the abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir, and the demolition drives in BJP-governed states such as Uttar Pradesh and Madhya rights to shelter, livelihood, and democratic participation are being hollowed out for marginalised communities, particularly Muslims, through the combined force of majoritarian ideology and administrative coercion. This is not merely a violation of individual rights—it is an assault on the Constitution's vision of pluralism and this climate of creeping authoritarianism and systemic exclusion, the onus lies squarely on the Supreme Court of must not only enforce its own judgments against illegal demolitions but also urgently hear and decide the long-pending batch of petitions challenging the constitutionality of the court must clarify, unequivocally, that citizenship in India cannot be determined by religion, nor denied due to the absence of documents that millions—due to social and economic marginalisation—simply do not the court must strike down the unconstitutional voter verification practices that convert routine electoral processes into tools of disenfranchisement. It must reassert the principle that democratic rights flow from residence, participation and belonging—not from the vagaries of a bureaucratic paper is at a constitutional crossroads. If the judiciary fails to act decisively, the slow-burning erosion of citizenship and democratic rights may soon become irreversible. What is at stake is not merely the fate of marginalised communities in Assam or Bihar, but the foundational promise of Indian democracy. A republic that denies its own people the right to belong has already begun to forget what it means to be a nation..(The writer is an assistant professor with the Department of Professional Studies, Christ University, Bengaluru).The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.
