Supreme Court Introduces Reservation for SC/ST/OBC in Supreme Court Staff Recruitment, Omits EWS Quota by CJI B R Gavai

Chief Justice of India (CJI) B R Gavai, who is only the second individual from the Dalit community to head the Indian judiciary, has made a significant policy change in the recruitment process for subordinate staff in the Supreme Court of India.

The CJI has amended the Supreme Court Officers and Servants (Conditions of Service and Conduct) Rules, 1961, ensuring reservation in direct recruitment for marginalized and disadvantaged communities.

Key Amendments to the Supreme Court Recruitment Policy

According to a notification issued on July 3, 2025, Rule 4A of the 1961 Rules has been amended and substituted under the directive of the Chief Justice. The updated rule mandates reservation in direct recruitment for the following categories:

• Scheduled Castes (SC)
• Scheduled Tribes (ST)
• Other Backward Classes (OBC)
• Physically Challenged Persons
• Ex-Servicemen
• Dependents of Freedom Fighters

The revised rule states:

“Reservation in direct recruitment to various categories of posts specified in the Schedule, for the candidates belonging to SCs, STs, OBCs, Physically Challenged, Ex-servicemen and dependants of Freedom Fighters shall be in accordance with the Rules, orders, and Notifications issued from time to time by the Government of India… subject to such modification, variation or exception as the Chief Justice may, from time to time, specify.”

Notably Missing: EWS Reservation

While the amendment is seen as a progressive move toward inclusivity and social justice, it has sparked debate for excluding reservation for the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS).

The EWS quota—introduced through the 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act in 2019—provides 10% reservation in government jobs and educational institutions for economically disadvantaged candidates who do not fall under SC, ST, or OBC categories.

The amendment introduced Articles 15(6) and 16(6) into the Constitution and received Presidential assent on January 12, 2019. Its implementation was widely seen as a step toward addressing economic inequality across communities. However, the new Supreme Court rule does not mention EWS in the list of eligible reservation categories.

Background on Legal Controversy Around EWS Quota

The constitutional validity of the EWS reservation has been under judicial scrutiny, with over 20 petitions challenging it. The core argument against the quota is that it allegedly violates the 50% ceiling on total reservation set by the Supreme Court’s landmark Indra Sawhney judgment in 1992.

Despite the legal challenges, the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the EWS quota in a 5-judge bench verdict in 2022, ruling that the 10% economic-based reservation does not violate the basic structure of the Constitution.

Possible Implications and Legal Interpretations

The omission of EWS reservation in the Supreme Court’s revised recruitment rules may raise fresh legal and political debates. Some experts suggest that since the recruitment is for non-government posts within the judiciary, the court may exercise discretionary powers. However, critics argue that excluding EWS candidates contradicts the spirit of inclusive policymaking upheld by the Constitution.

This move comes at a time when CJI Gavai’s leadership is being closely watched for its stand on equity, representation, and reform within the judicial system.

Conclusion

The amendment to Rule 4A under the Supreme Court’s recruitment rules marks a significant milestone in promoting representation for marginalized communities. However, the absence of EWS quota raises pressing questions about policy uniformity, especially after the EWS reservation received full constitutional backing.

As India continues to balance social justice with economic inclusion, developments like these will remain under the public and legal microscope.