BharatNotes Indra Sawhney Case
/ˈɪndrə ˈsɑːhni keɪs/Indra Sawhney and Others v. Union of India (1992) — a landmark nine-judge Supreme Court Constitution Bench judgment that upheld 27% reservation for OBCs in Central government services, but simultaneously imposed four crucial conditions: (i) exclusion of the creamy layer from OBC benefits, (ii) a 50% ceiling on total reservations (subject to extraordinary situations), (iii) no reservations in promotions (only initial appointments), and (iv) a new concept of 'Other Backward Classes' distinct from economically backward classes.
Context & Background
The judgment was a response to the Mandal Commission implementation and arose from the self-immolation protests of 1990. Written by Justice B.P. Jeevan Reddy with six concurring and two dissenting opinions. It remains the foundational precedent for reservation jurisprudence in India, cited in virtually every subsequent reservation case including M. Nagaraj (2006), Jarnail Singh (2018), Davinder Singh (2024), and the EWS quota validation (Janhit Abhiyan 2022). The 50% ceiling has been exceeded by Tamil Nadu (69%) — protected by the Ninth Schedule.
UPSC Exam Relevance
GS2 Social Justice — Prelims: 9-judge bench (1992); upheld 27% OBC reservation; creamy layer concept first introduced; 50% ceiling (not a hard rule — Tamil Nadu exception); no reservations in promotions (now superseded for SCs/STs by 85th Amendment + M. Nagaraj conditions); separate category for SC/ST vs OBC (creamy layer not applied to SCs/STs — confirmed by Ashoka Kumar Thakur 2008). Mains: balancing equality (Art. 14) vs special provisions (Art. 15, 16); creamy layer as proxy for socio-economic advancement; 50% ceiling rationale — preventing reservation becoming the rule rather than exception; EWS reservation (103rd Amendment, 2019) — Janhit Abhiyan case (2022) upheld by 3-2 majority, departed from 50% ceiling.
