Archive · 30 Aug 2026
NDA Ministers Clash Over SC/ST Quota Within Quota
Two ministers in the same political alliance disagree about how SC/ST reservations should work.
Jitan Ram Majhi supports giving separate reservation shares to different SC/ST communities.
He says the Supreme Court of India has supported this idea and that several states have adopted it.
Chirag Paswan is worried about adding a creamy layer based on a family’s economic situation.
He says reservations were created because some communities faced long-term social discrimination and untouchability.
Paswan says major changes should be discussed by Parliament and through the Constitution.
Both ministers said the other side should consider resigning.
The disagreement is happening within the National Democratic Alliance.
Jitan Ram Majhi accused Chirag Paswan of unconstitutional conduct over the SC/ST reservation debate.
Majhi defended quota within a quota, citing a Supreme Court of India majority ruling and implementation in about six states.
Chirag Paswan opposed introducing a creamy layer based on economic status in SC/ST reservations.
Paswan argued reservations address social discrimination, exclusion and untouchability, not merely economic disadvantage.
Majhi and Paswan also challenged each other over resignations, while Paswan questioned Congress and Rahul Gandhi’s accountability.
- Who
- Union Ministers Jitan Ram Majhi and Chirag Paswan, along with Bihar Minister Santosh Suman, are central to the dispute; Rahul Gandhi and Congress were also questioned by Paswan.
- What
- NDA leaders are divided over SC/ST sub-categorisation, quota within a quota, and whether a creamy layer provision should be introduced.
- When
- The dispute intensified on Sunday after Paswan’s remarks the previous day.
- Where
- The statements were made in New Delhi and reported in connection with the Bihar-based political dispute.
- Why
- Majhi and Suman say sub-categorisation would help benefits reach deprived communities more equally, while Paswan says economic criteria could weaken reservations’ purpose of addressing social discrimination.
Sub-categorisation Supporters
Social-Discrimination Concerns
Quota within a quota
Sub-categorisation Supporters
Jitan Ram Majhi and Santosh Suman support sub-categorisation, saying separate shares would help deprived SC/ST communities receive reservation benefits more equally.
Social-Discrimination Concerns
Chirag Paswan’s cited remarks focused on opposing a creamy layer and called for constitutional and parliamentary discussion before changing the reservation system; he did not endorse Majhi’s position in the reported statements.
Basis of reservations
Sub-categorisation Supporters
Majhi and Suman argue that benefits have not reached all SC/ST communities equally, so the existing system should be adjusted without ending reservations.
Social-Discrimination Concerns
Paswan says reservation is intended to address centuries of social discrimination, exclusion and untouchability, rather than being determined by economic status.
Resignations and accountability
Sub-categorisation Supporters
Majhi said those speaking against the Constitution should resign, arguing that quota within a quota has judicial support.
Social-Discrimination Concerns
Paswan said supporters of the creamy layer should give up their posts and also questioned Congress and Rahul Gandhi’s accountability over continuing social discrimination.
- Main dispute
- SC/ST reservation sub-categorisation and the proposed creamy layer concept
- Jitan Ram Majhi’s position
- He supports quota within a quota and called Paswan’s opposition unconstitutional.
- Chirag Paswan’s position
- He opposes introducing a creamy layer based on economic status and wants a wider constitutional and parliamentary debate.
- Court reference
- Majhi said a majority ruling of the Supreme Court of India supported quota within a quota and directed states to implement it.
- State implementation
- Majhi said around half a dozen states have already implemented the arrangement.
- Additional political criticism
- Paswan questioned Congress and Rahul Gandhi’s responsibility for persistent social discrimination.