In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India declared on Wednesday that the income of parents cannot be the sole criterion for determining whether an individual belongs to the creamy layer of the Other Backward Classes (OBC). This decision came from a bench comprising Justices PS Narasimha and R Mahadevan, who dismissed appeals from the Union government and upheld previous judgments from the Madras, Delhi, and Kerala High Courts.

The case arose when candidates who had successfully passed the civil services examination conducted by the Union Public Service Commission were denied OBC benefits. The reason? Their parents’ earnings exceeded the threshold set for the creamy layer classification. Many of these parents were employed in public sector undertakings, banks, or private firms, which added further complexity to the situation.

The term ‘creamy layer’ typically refers to the more prosperous and advanced segments within a community eligible for affirmative action benefits. The Supreme Court emphasized that determining a person’s creamy layer status should primarily consider the nature of the posts held by their parents rather than just their income. This perspective aligns with the government’s own 1993 memorandum, which clarified that income from salary and agricultural activities should not be aggregated with earnings from other sources when applying the income test.

This ruling is likely to have far-reaching implications for the OBC community and how benefits are distributed among its members. It underscores the need for a more nuanced approach to classification that takes into account various factors beyond mere parental income. The decision reflects a growing recognition of the need to evaluate candidates based on their individual merits rather than broad financial criteria alone.