Caste-based reservation cannot be carried forward after conversion to Islam: SC

The reservation availed of on the basis of a backward caste in the Hindu religion cannot be carried forward to another religion embraced by a person, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday, October 15, upholding a Madras High Court judgment that struck down a Tamil Nadu government order permitting such benefits to converts to Islam.

A Bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Shree Chandrashekhar dismissed the Tamil Nadu government’s appeal against the High Court’s June verdict, holding that caste-based backwardness acquired by birth among Hindus could not automatically be retained after conversion to another faith.

The government order, issued on March 9, 2024, allowed converts from Backward Classes (BC), Most Backward Classes (MBC), Denotified Communities and Scheduled Castes (SC) to obtain community certificates under one of seven recognised Backward Class Muslim groups in Tamil Nadu, thereby enabling them to claim reservation benefits.

The Bench observed that Article 16(4) of the Constitution, which permits reservation in public employment for inadequately represented backward classes, could not be invoked merely by relying on one’s caste status before conversion. It also referred to the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, under which Scheduled Caste status is restricted to Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists, meaning that a Dalit converting to Islam loses SC status and its associated benefits.

The court further clarified that returning to Hinduism would not automatically restore a person’s former backward-class status, as eligibility must be established independently rather than determined solely by the caste into which the person was born.

The dispute arose from a petition filed by Sameer Ahamed, formerly known as Paramasivam, who was born to Hindu parents in Thoothukudi district and converted to Islam in 2015. After changing his name and marrying according to Islamic rites, he sought a ‘Muslim Lebbai’ community certificate under the 2024 government order, but his application was rejected by the tahsildar.

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court subsequently invalidated the order, reasoning that although a person could embrace Islam, membership of a particular Muslim community could not be acquired merely through conversion, since groups such as Labbai, Rowther and Marakkayar were associated with birth.

Describing the order as “not only unconstitutional but also un-Islamic”, the High Court emphasised Islam’s principle of equality and held that the executive order was arbitrary and could not override binding judicial decisions.

The State had defended the measure, arguing that it followed a recommendation by the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Commission and sought to prevent existing beneficiaries from losing reservation advantages upon conversion.