The Supreme Court on Friday reiterated that the salary income of parents cannot be mechanically included while determining the creamy layer status of candidates seeking reservation benefits under the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category.
A Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and R. Mahadevan clarified that its earlier judgment interpreting the applicable government instructions on OBC creamy layer determination was not open to reconsideration, rejecting the Union government's attempt to seek a modification of the ruling.
The clarification came while disposing of miscellaneous applications filed by the Centre seeking permission to apply the pre-existing criteria for determining OBC creamy layer status to candidates recommended in the Civil Services Examination (CSE) 2025 and to limit the retrospective implications of the earlier judgment. The apex court held that the principle laid down in its judgment delivered on March 11, 2026, would govern service allocation to OBC candidates selected through CSE 2025, as the allocation process had not yet been finalised.
"Since the process of allocation remains pending and there is no convincing or reasonable justification for deferring the implementation of the judgment dated 11.03.2026, the creamy layer principle, as interpreted in the said judgment, shall govern the allocation of services to OBC candidates selected through the Civil Services Examination, 2025," it said.
The earlier judgment had dealt with candidates who cleared the Civil Services Examination but were denied OBC reservation benefits after the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) treated them as falling within the creamy layer by taking into account the income of their parents employed in public sector undertakings (PSUs).
The candidates had challenged the decision before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), with their cases subsequently receiving relief from the Madras, Delhi and Kerala High Courts. Dismissing the Centre's appeals in March this year, the Supreme Court had directed the Union government to consider the claims of the candidates and intervenors in accordance with the principles laid down in the judgment and implement the directions within six months.
In its latest order, the Justice Narasimha-led Bench clarified that the earlier ruling did not require reopening completed selections, appointments or service allocations, or disturbing the seniority of other employees.
However, it said the interpretation of the 1993 Office Memorandum and the 2004 clarificatory letter would remain binding under Article 141 of the Constitution. The top court also clarified that claims of similarly placed candidates whose cases are pending before courts, tribunals or other competent authorities could be considered on their own merits, taking into account the interpretation laid down in the March judgment.
The Centre had sought two years to undertake an exercise to establish equivalence between posts in PSUs, banks and other organisations and government posts, besides formulating a uniform mechanism for determining creamy layer status.
Declining to prescribe any timeline for the exercise, the Justice Narasimha-led Bench said these matters fell within the domain of the executive and the legislature. The Supreme Court extended the time for compliance with its earlier judgment by two months and disposed of the applications.
A Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and R. Mahadevan clarified that its earlier judgment interpreting the applicable government instructions on OBC creamy layer determination was not open to reconsideration, rejecting the Union government's attempt to seek a modification of the ruling.
The clarification came while disposing of miscellaneous applications filed by the Centre seeking permission to apply the pre-existing criteria for determining OBC creamy layer status to candidates recommended in the Civil Services Examination (CSE) 2025 and to limit the retrospective implications of the earlier judgment. The apex court held that the principle laid down in its judgment delivered on March 11, 2026, would govern service allocation to OBC candidates selected through CSE 2025, as the allocation process had not yet been finalised.
"Since the process of allocation remains pending and there is no convincing or reasonable justification for deferring the implementation of the judgment dated 11.03.2026, the creamy layer principle, as interpreted in the said judgment, shall govern the allocation of services to OBC candidates selected through the Civil Services Examination, 2025," it said.
The earlier judgment had dealt with candidates who cleared the Civil Services Examination but were denied OBC reservation benefits after the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) treated them as falling within the creamy layer by taking into account the income of their parents employed in public sector undertakings (PSUs).
The candidates had challenged the decision before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), with their cases subsequently receiving relief from the Madras, Delhi and Kerala High Courts. Dismissing the Centre's appeals in March this year, the Supreme Court had directed the Union government to consider the claims of the candidates and intervenors in accordance with the principles laid down in the judgment and implement the directions within six months.
In its latest order, the Justice Narasimha-led Bench clarified that the earlier ruling did not require reopening completed selections, appointments or service allocations, or disturbing the seniority of other employees.
However, it said the interpretation of the 1993 Office Memorandum and the 2004 clarificatory letter would remain binding under Article 141 of the Constitution. The top court also clarified that claims of similarly placed candidates whose cases are pending before courts, tribunals or other competent authorities could be considered on their own merits, taking into account the interpretation laid down in the March judgment.
The Centre had sought two years to undertake an exercise to establish equivalence between posts in PSUs, banks and other organisations and government posts, besides formulating a uniform mechanism for determining creamy layer status.
Declining to prescribe any timeline for the exercise, the Justice Narasimha-led Bench said these matters fell within the domain of the executive and the legislature. The Supreme Court extended the time for compliance with its earlier judgment by two months and disposed of the applications.
