Channel
Reservations in the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has introduced reservations for SC and ST staff in its own ranks—15% for SCs and 7.5% for STs. We explain.
Transcript:
Hello everyone and welcome to SCO’s channel. I’m Spandana. The Supreme Court of India has recently taken a historic step. This time by turning the lens inwards. For the first time in its 75 year history, it has formally introduced a reservation policy for scheduled caste and scheduled tribe staff within its own administrative ranks. On 24 June, the Court announced that it will extend reservations to SC and ST employees for both direct appointments and promotions. 15 percent for the scheduled caste employees and 7.5% for the scheduled tribe employees, bringing its internal policies in line with the Union government’s framework.
The Roster published by the Supreme Court presently covers 1,280 posts, including over 600 junior staff attendants and 437 junior court assistants. Other roles include chamber attendants and library staff. Crucially, the Roster currently applies only to non judicial roles. Judicial appointments, that is the appointment of judges, remains untouched. Notably, the new Roster of reservations doesn’t yet include Other Backward Classes or OBCs. But on 3 July, the Supreme Court uploaded a gazette notification dated 3 July 2025. The notification amends the service rules of the Court staff to extend reservations not just to scheduled caste and scheduled tribes, but also to other backward classes, the physically challenged, ex servicemen and dependents of freedom fighters. This is in accordance with the Government of India’s norms.
Though the current staff roster reflects only scheduled caste and scheduled tribe reservations, this recent notification may well lay the foundation for a broader inclusion going forward. Extending the reservations for OBCs would also align with the court’s own precedent in 1992 in the Indira Sawhney judgment which upheld OBC reservations across government institutions. While the Court has long shaped India’s affirmative action framework from the outside, this is the first time it has applied it to itself. CJI BR Gavai, under whose leadership this move is effectuated, stated that ”all government institutions and many high courts already have provisions for reservations for scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. So why should the Supreme Court be an exception? Our actions, the Chief said, must reflect our principles.
The legal architecture for reservations in India has been evolving for decades. Notably in RK Sabarwal v. State of Punjab in 1995, the Court held that reservations must be based on sanctioned posts, not just yearly vacancies. This led to the adoption of a post based roster system. Later in 2006, in Nagaraj v Union of India, the Court upheld the constitutional amendment enabling reservations in promotions. But the Court had imposed strict conditions around quantifiable data on backwardness, underrepresentation and administrative efficiency. These conditions proved impractical to meet. So In Jarnail Singh v Lacchmi Narain Gupta, in 2018, the court did away with the requirement to re-establish the backwardness of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes as they were already enmarked in the presidential list.
More recently, In Davinder Singh v State of Punjab in 2024, the Court reiterated the need for substantive equality by recognising sub-classifications within the Schedule Caste and Schedule tribe categories. For nearly three decades since R.K Sabharwal the Court’s inaction on reservations stood in stark contrast to its constitutional eloquence. Grand institutions that command respect may find it convenient to let institutional inertia remain unsettled. So it’s not that the Court never had the opportunity to answer the call for change. It simply had never felt the pressure. So why did this shift take place nearly three decades since Sabarwal? Well, what seems to have tipped the scales this time is leadership. That it took until 2025 for the Chief Justice of India to absolve the Court of its negative exceptionalism on the affirmation action front speaks to the glacial pace of certain institutional changes. But it is fitting that the decision was finally taken by only the second Dalit Chief justice in the Court’s 75 year history.
Like other administrative changes, this move will also be tested by its implementation. For instance, how will the Court fill its backlogs and cross the bridge to OBC reservations? These things will be watched closely, but for now, the fact that an institution that directs others to uphold constitutional mandates has turned the gaze inwards is worthy of a note. CJI B.R Gavai’s term may be brief, but internal reforms such as this one will ensure that it won’t go unnoticed. Read the story now on scobserver in. Thank you for tuning in, and stay tuned to our website for more stories from the Supreme Court.