The apex court observes that inclusion in reservation categories is a policy decision requiring a socio-economic study
NEW DELHI — The Supreme Court has refused to entertain a petition seeking inclusion of Pasmanda Muslims in the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category, stating clearly that the matter falls within the domain of the government and Parliament, not the judiciary.
The Bench, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, on Monday observed that adding any new caste or community to the reservation list involves policy decisions that require detailed socio-economic evaluation and legislative consideration.
During the hearing, the Chief Justice remarked that the court cannot be expected to frame policy or enact law.
“‘You are asking us to make law. You want us to consider including a specific section of Muslims in the OBC category. This is a matter of policy,” the CJI observed.
The court further clarified that reservation status is not granted solely based on religion or identity, but on multiple parameters, including measurable social and economic backwardness.
“Such decisions require a full socio-economic study. The judiciary cannot determine which category within a religion should be treated as backward and which should not,” the court noted.
The judges questioned how the court could independently assess whether one section of Muslims qualifies as backward while another does not, without comprehensive data and expert evaluation.
The petitioner argued that Pasmanda Muslims — socially and economically marginalised groups within the Muslim community — deserve inclusion in the OBC category due to longstanding disadvantage.
Counsel for the petitioner referred to a pending matter regarding OBC classification and the four percent reservation for Muslims in Andhra Pradesh, suggesting that similar considerations should apply.
However, the court stated that a petition filed under Article 32 cannot be used to seek such complex policy determinations.
The bench observed that inclusion in the OBC list requires detailed surveys, quantifiable data, and recommendations from expert commissions — all of which fall within the executive’s authority.
The court reiterated that reservation classification involves constitutional, social and administrative considerations. It emphasised that the executive branch is better equipped to conduct field surveys, commission reports and policy evaluations.
“These are matters for the government and Parliament. Courts cannot undertake the exercise of categorising communities for reservation,” the Bench said.
Pasmanda Muslims refer to socially and economically backward groups within the Muslim community. The term “Pasmanda” literally means “those left behind” and is used to describe communities that have historically faced marginalisation.
For years, there has been a demand from sections of this community for reservation benefits comparable to those available to other backward classes.
However, with the Supreme Court’s latest ruling, it is now clear that any decision on extending OBC status to Pasmanda Muslims can only be taken at the governmental or parliamentary level.
The ruling reinforces the constitutional principle of separation of powers, under which courts interpret law but do not create policy frameworks for reservation.
While the petition has been dismissed, the debate over the inclusion of socially and economically backward Muslim groups in reservation frameworks is likely to continue in political and policy circles.
For now, the court’s position remains clear: such decisions must originate from the executive and legislative branches, supported by comprehensive socio-economic data.
