Archive · 27 Aug 2026
Centre's OBC Plea Challenged After Supreme Court Salary Ruling
OBC reservations help eligible people receive opportunities in government jobs and education.
Some wealthier OBC families are excluded through a rule called the creamy layer.
The Supreme Court said salary and farm earnings should not be counted in that income test.
The government had previously used salary income in some cases, especially for public-sector employees.
This caused some candidates who passed civil-service exams to lose or wait for appointments.
The government now wants to use the old rule for 958 candidates whose examination process was completed before the ruling.
It also wants two years to make a new policy.
OBC representatives and former officials say the government should follow the court's ruling without delay.
The Supreme Court has agreed to send the government's request to a special bench.
The Supreme Court ruled on March 11 that salary and agricultural earnings should be excluded from OBC creamy-layer calculations.
The Department of Personnel and Training has asked to use the earlier formula for allocating jobs to 958 UPSC-recommended candidates.
The department is seeking two years to create a policy addressing what the court called hostile discrimination.
Nearly 100 civil-service candidates reportedly have not received appointment letters because of the disputed income criteria.
OBC organisations and academics called the Centre's plea a delaying tactic and questioned its reluctance to create supernumerary posts.
- Who
- The Department of Personnel and Training, the Supreme Court, OBC organisations, academics, and affected civil-service candidates.
- What
- The Centre is seeking permission to use the former OBC creamy-layer formula for 958 UPSC-recommended candidates despite the Supreme Court's ruling on salary income.
- When
- The Supreme Court issued its ruling on March 11; the DoPT subsequently filed its miscellaneous application.
- Where
- The dispute concerns central government jobs and admissions, public-sector undertakings, and the Supreme Court in India.
- Why
- The DoPT says the examination and results preceded the ruling and seeks time to create a policy, while critics say the request delays implementation of the judgment.
Critics' view
Centre's position
Implementation of the ruling
Critics' view
OBC organisations, academics, and Justice V. Eswaraiah say the DoPT should implement the Supreme Court judgment and create supernumerary posts for affected candidates.
Centre's position
The DoPT is seeking permission to apply the earlier creamy-layer formula to 958 candidates because their examination was completed and results were declared before the March 11 ruling.
Request for more time
Critics' view
The All India OBC Employees Federation describes the request for two years as a delaying tactic after the court settled the issue.
Centre's position
The DoPT has requested two years to frame an appropriate policy to rectify the discrimination identified by the Supreme Court.
Treatment of public-sector employees
Critics' view
Critics say children of employees of public-sector undertakings, including BSNL where post equivalence has been established, continue to face discrimination under the income test.
Centre's position
The DoPT's application reflects its effort to manage service allocations under the formula used before the Supreme Court ruling while a broader policy is prepared.
- OBC reservation
- OBCs are entitled to 27% reservation in central government jobs and admissions to central educational institutions.
- Supreme Court ruling
- The court held that salary and agricultural earnings should be excluded from creamy-layer income calculations.
- Candidates affected
- The DoPT seeks to proceed with allocations for 958 candidates recommended by the UPSC.
- Earlier clarification
- A 2004 DoPT clarification said salary could be included in income for creamy-layer determination.
- Appointment delays
- Nearly 100 civil-service candidates who cleared examinations over the last 10 years reportedly have not received appointment letters.
- Policy request
- The DoPT has sought two years to frame a policy intended to address the court's finding of hostile discrimination.
- Court response
- The Supreme Court agreed to refer the DoPT's plea to a special bench.