Anyone opposing SC subcategorization should be viewed as an enemy: MRPS chief

Madiga called for those opposing sub-categorization to resign and contest in elections, criticizing the Malas community of "misleading" people.

Hyderabad: Manda Krishna Madiga, the founder and president of the Madiga Reservation Porata Samithi (MRPS), stated that anyone opposing the Scheduled Caste (SC) sub-categorization should be viewed as an “enemy.”

During a meeting held at the Somajiguda Press Club on Monday, he emphasized that no political party is against Scheduled Caste (SC) sub-categorization, asserting that it cannot be obstructed by anyone.

He urged those who are against this categorization to either resign from their current parties and join one that opposes it or to establish their own party.

Hyderabad Institute of Excellence“ width=

Madiga called for those opposing sub-categorization to resign and contest in elections, criticizing the Malas community of “misleading” people.

He expressed that the meeting was convened to address the challenges posed by those who claim to stand against SC sub-categorization and reservations, highlighting the need for social justice.

Leaders from MRPS and affiliated organizations participated in this meeting.

SC subcategorization

Recent developments regarding the sub-categorization of Scheduled Castes (SCs) in India have been significantly influenced by a landmark Supreme Court ruling on August 1, 2024.

This ruling permits state governments to create sub-classifications within the SC and Scheduled Tribes (ST) categories for reservation purposes, fundamentally altering the landscape of affirmative action policies in the country.

The Supreme Court’s decision overruled a previous judgment from 2004 in the E.V. Chinnaiah vs. State of Andhra Pradesh case, which had deemed SCs as a homogeneous group that could not be subdivided for reservation benefits.

The recent ruling recognizes that SCs are socially heterogeneous and allows states to identify and provide targeted benefits to the most disadvantaged subgroups within these categories.

The Supreme Court emphasized that any sub-classification should be based on empirical evidence and historical data demonstrating varying levels of backwardness among different SC groups. 

Back to top button