A CRITICAL STUDY OF INDIA’S RESERVATION POLICY WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON THE CREAMY LAYER PRINCIPLE

This research paper examines India’s constitutional policy of reservations with a special focus on the creamy layer principle. It analyses the doctrinal evolution of the principle from Indra Sawhney v. Union of India and traces how the judiciary used it to exclude the socially and economically advanced among backward classes. The study identifies that while the doctrine aims to balance equity and merit, its application has remained inconsistent. The absence of statutory codification and lack of centralised data undermine its effectiveness. The exclusion relies heavily on income and occupational thresholds, failing to account for social capital, inherited privilege, and intersectional disadvantages. The research also evaluates key judgments including Jarnail Singh, which extended creamy layer exclusion to SC/STs in promotions, and Janhit Abhiyan, where EWS reservation bypassed the doctrine altogether. The study critiques the lack of uniform policy across states and the inefficiencies in periodic revision of income limits. Comparisons with affirmative action models in the US, South Africa, Brazil, and Malaysia highlight India’s unique position in adopting intra-group exclusion as a legal filter. The paper argues that unless legislative reforms are undertaken, the creamy layer principle risks becoming a bureaucratic rule without meaningful constitutional impact. It recommends a data-driven, socially sensitive, and uniformly applicable model. A revised creamy layer framework must include non-economic indicators, gender justice elements, and sunset clauses to ensure equitable circulation of benefits. The study concludes that effective implementation of the creamy layer rule can restore public trust and make affirmative action truly inclusive.