<\/p>\n
Madurai High Court verdict on denying backward class reservation to those converting to Islam, a setback to Social Justice and Religious Freedom<\/p>\n
Tamil Nadu Government Must Appeal the Judgment<\/p>\n
Adv. Kayal Ahamed Sahib<\/p>\n
Chennai, June 29<\/p>\n
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has struck down the Tamil Nadu Government’s G.O. (Ms.) No. 31 dated 09.03.2024, which permitted persons embracing Islam to avail themselves of reservation benefits under the Backward Class Muslims (BCM) category. The Court held that the Government Order was unconstitutional.<\/p>\n
Although the judgment was delivered in a petition filed by an individual, Mr. Shameer Ahmed, the Court went far beyond the relief sought by the petitioner and invalidated the Government Order itself, thereby affecting all individuals across Tamil Nadu who have converted to Islam. This has caused serious concern.<\/p>\n
Under the Government Order issued by the Tamil Nadu Government, persons belonging to the BC, MBC, DNC and SC communities who embraced Islam were entitled to obtain community certificates under any one of the seven recognised Backward Class Muslim communities in Tamil Nadu and continue to enjoy reservation benefits.<\/p>\n
This was not an arbitrary or sudden concession. It was a well-considered policy decision based on the long-standing demands of the Muslim community, extensive social studies, and the recommendations of the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Commission.<\/p>\n
The fundamental flaw in the judgment lies in its underlying assumption. A person’s social, educational and economic backwardness does not disappear overnight merely because they change their religion.<\/p>\n
Religion is a matter of personal faith. However, social background, poverty, lack of educational opportunities and historical disadvantages do not vanish simply because an individual adopts a different religion. Why did the Court fail to recognise that conversion does not automatically erase social backwardness?<\/p>\n
Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution of India empower the State to make special provisions for socially and educationally backward classes. Reservation is not a mechanism to perpetuate caste; rather, it is a constitutional instrument designed to uplift socially and educationally disadvantaged communities and advance social justice.<\/p>\n
The judgment observes that Islam does not recognise caste distinctions. There can be no disagreement with that proposition. Islam indeed upholds the principle of human equality.<\/p>\n
However, reservation is not granted on the basis of religious doctrine. It is based on social and educational backwardness. While Islam may reject caste, the real question is whether the Court examined whether social and educational backwardness continues to exist among the affected communities.<\/p>\n
Even today, most Backward Class Muslim communities in Tamil Nadu continue to lag behind in education, employment and economic advancement. The egalitarian principles of Islam cannot be equated with the socio-economic realities experienced by these communities.<\/p>\n
The Supreme Court, in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) and several subsequent judgments, has consistently recognised the power of State Governments to identify backward classes and extend reservation benefits to them.<\/p>\n
The Tamil Nadu Government issued this Government Order only after considering the recommendations of the Backward Classes Commission. Rejecting the considered opinion of such an expert statutory body requires compelling legal and social justification. Should not the judiciary accord due respect to the policy decisions taken by the State within its constitutional domain?<\/p>\n
Article 25 of the Constitution guarantees every citizen the fundamental right to freely profess, practise and propagate religion, including the freedom to change one’s religion.<\/p>\n
If converting to another religion results in the loss of reservation benefits, it could indirectly discourage individuals from exercising their constitutional right to religious conversion. Such a consequence raises a significant constitutional issue and appears inconsistent with the spirit of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. We therefore view this judgment of the Madurai Bench as an encroachment upon the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, in this case, the Court has gone beyond adjudicating the petitioner’s individual grievance and has invalidated the entire Government Order, resulting in far-reaching consequences.<\/p>\n
It is also legitimate to ask whether the Tamil Nadu Government effectively and comprehensively defended the long-standing reservation rights of the Muslim community before the Court.<\/p>\n
This judgment deserves reconsideration as it raises several important constitutional questions:<\/p>\n
– Does a person’s social backwardness automatically cease upon conversion to another religion?<\/p>\n
– To what extent can the judiciary review and interfere with policy decisions taken by an elected State Government?<\/p>\n
– How should Articles 15(4), 16(4), 25 and the constitutional principle of social justice be harmoniously interpreted?<\/p>\n
Ultimately, these important constitutional questions require authoritative determination by the Supreme Court of India. We therefore believe that the Tamil Nadu Government must immediately file an appeal against this judgment.<\/p>\n
Will the Government led by Chief Minister Vijay uphold its commitment to social justice by challenging this verdict?<\/p>\n
(The writer Adv. Kayal Ahamed Sahib is a State Secretary (Ideological Propaganda Wing) of\u00a0 Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madurai High Court verdict on denying backward class reservation to those converting to Islam, a setback to Social Justice and Religious Freedom Tamil Nadu Government Must Appeal the Judgment Adv. Kayal Ahamed Sahib Chennai, June 29 The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has struck down the Tamil Nadu Government’s G.O. (Ms.) No. …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":8991,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[92,33,1284,91,56],"tags":[4136,4135,4137,4096],"class_list":["post-8990","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-featured","category-international","category-international-political-national","category-national","category-politics","tag-advocate-kayal-ahamed-sahib","tag-madurai-bench-of-madras-high-court","tag-tamilnadu-government","tag-viduthalai-chiruthaigal-katchi-vck"],"yoast_head":"\n