The debate has once again intensified in the country regarding the limit of reservation and the creamy layer. The Supreme Court on Friday (May 22, 2026) raised the question in the hearing regarding OBC reservation and creamy layer that if both the parents of the candidate are IAS officers, then why should he get the benefit of reservation.

Justice B. The bench of V. Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuinya said that apart from economic, social conditions should also be considered in reservation. These comments have been made by Justice BV Nagarathna. In the petition, questions were raised on the rule in which it was said that it was wrong to make the job of the parents a basis for placing children in the creamy layer category.

The court said that it does not seem right to ask for reservation for the children of IAS officers. However, despite these comments, the Supreme Court issued notice accepting the petition for hearing. The Supreme Court is hearing petitions in which reservation has been demanded for creamy layer candidates of backward class.

Justice B. V. Nagarathna has made very important comments during this period. He said, ‘The candidate’s parents are IAS officers and are in government jobs. They are in good condition. Now that the government has excluded these people from reservation, these people are raising questions on it.

Also read:- ‘Accept the apology of those who wrote the controversial chapter of NCERT book’, Supreme Court withdrew the order, said- now they will get job…

The court said, ‘With educational and economic empowerment also comes social stability. If we still demand reservation for children, then we will never get relief from it. We have to pay attention to this. Senior advocate Shashank Ratnu, appearing in the case, said that the people who have raised this issue have been excluded from reservation on the basis of their social status and not on the basis of salary. Demanding a thorough investigation, he said that it is necessary to differentiate between the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) and the Creamy Layer. On this, Justice Nagarathna said that EWS does not talk about social backwardness but only about economic backwardness.

Shashank Ratanu argued that the norms in the case of creamy layer should be more liberal than those of EWS. He said that if both the sections are seen in the same way then there will be no difference between them. Justice Nagarathna said that it is important to maintain balance. He said that even if a person is educationally or economically backward, the situation changes when his parents achieve a certain level by taking advantage of reservation. After this, the court issued a notice and sought answers from the concerned parties.

Also read:- ‘Suddenly it is difficult to learn a new language…’, petition filed against CBSE’s new language policy in 9th class, SC ready to hear.

The Supreme Court has said that whether a candidate belonging to Other Backward Class (OBC) belongs to the creamy layer or non-creamy layer cannot be determined by his income alone. On Wednesday (March 11, 2026), the court has given this historic decision making important changes in the determination of Non-Creamy Layer (NCL) of OBC. The court said that the decision of creamy layer cannot be based only on the salary or income of the parents, but as per the original guidelines of 1993, the position of the post and other factors also have to be kept in mind.

The bench of Justice PS Narasimha and Justice R Mahadevan said this while confirming the decisions of Madras, Kerala and Delhi High Courts, which are related to the eligibility of candidates claiming the benefit of OBC (non-creamy layer) for civil services examinations.

The Supreme Court said that if the parents are in Group C or Group D (Class III or IV) in a government job, their salary will not be added to determine the creamy layer. Besides, income from agriculture will also be completely excluded. To qualify for the creamy layer, the total family income from ‘other sources’ (like business, property, rent etc.) should be less than Rs 8 lakh per annum on an average for three consecutive years.

In this decision, the Supreme Court has declared invalid Para 9 of the letter of the Department of Personnel and Training of 2004, in which it was said to include the salary of bank, private sector or PSU employees in the creamy layer. The court called it discriminatory and said that children of government employees and children of private or PSU employees cannot be treated differently. Until equivalence of PSU or private posts with Government Group Third or Fourth is decided, only the original orders of 1993 will remain in force.

This decision is a big relief for thousands of OBC candidates who were earlier denied reservation by considering them as creamy layer due to salary or other misinterpretation. Such people are in government jobs, but could not reach the right cadre or post. The court has directed to implement the decision retrospectively (from the previous date). DoPT has been given 6 months time to implement this decision. If necessary, supernumerary posts (additional posts) will be created, so that the seniority of other categories of employees is not affected.

Going forward, valid OBC-NCL certificate (issued from District Magistrate or Tehsildar) will be given preference in Civil Services Examination and rejection based only on salary will be stopped. This decision will restore the real purpose of OBC reservation, which is to provide benefits to the real needy backward classes. In many cases like Rohit Nathan (CSE-2012) and Ketan Batch (CSE-2015), DoPT will have to re-examine in 6 months and restore OBC-NCL status.

Also read:-
Supreme Court did not listen to the demand to bring Netaji’s ashes to India, said – will consider if his daughter files a petition