Internal quota: Karnataka govt. notifies new ratio

The Karnataka government notified a revised internal reservation formula dividing the existing 15% Scheduled Caste quota into three sub-groups: Group A (SC L...

What Happened

The Karnataka government notified a revised internal reservation formula dividing the existing 15% Scheduled Caste quota into three sub-groups: Group A (SC Left/Madiga community and allied castes) — 5.25%, Group B (SC Right/Holeya community and allied groups) — 5.25%, and Group C (Others and Nomadic castes including Bhovi, Lambani, and 59 Alemari castes) — 4.5%.
The notification covers 101 Scheduled Castes recognised in the state's Presidential List and introduces a new "Scheduled Castes General" category to accommodate castes that do not clearly fit the existing sub-group classifications.
The state withdrew an earlier notification based on a 6:6:5 formula and issued the revised notification following deliberations that included a Chitradurga convention representing all 101 SC communities.
Recruitment for 56,432 government posts announced in the state budget is to begin under the new formula immediately after the notification.
Practical questions have been raised about how roster-point systems — which allocate specific reserved-category slots in a service sequentially — will work under the three-way internal division.
The move implements the constitutional mandate affirmed by the Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh (2024), which overruled the earlier bar on sub-classification.

Static Topic Bridges

Sub-Classification Within SC/ST Categories — Constitutional Permissibility

Sub-classification refers to the practice of dividing a broad reserved category (such as the Scheduled Castes under the 15% quota) into smaller sub-groups, each with its own share of that quota, to ensure that the most historically disadvantaged among the SCs receive a larger share of reservation benefits.

Constitutional provision: Article 16(4) — power of the State to make reservations in appointments for inadequately represented classes; read with Articles 341 and 342 (President's power to specify SCs and STs).
Landmark judgment (overruled): E.V. Chinnaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2004) — a five-judge Constitution Bench held that Scheduled Castes form a single, homogenous class and cannot be sub-classified by states; any division would amount to tinkering with the Presidential List under Article 341(2), which only Parliament can alter.
Landmark judgment (current law): State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh & Others (2024) — a seven-judge Constitution Bench (6:1 majority) overruled E.V. Chinnaiah; held that sub-classification within SC/ST categories is constitutionally permissible because Article 341 does not create a single homogenous class; sub-classification must be based on empirical data demonstrating relative backwardness; states may adopt either a preference model (priority access) or an exclusive model (ring-fenced seats).
Condition imposed: Sub-classification cannot totally exclude any SC sub-group; it must be backed by rational, empirically verifiable criteria.
Justice Trivedi's dissent (2024): Only Parliament can alter the Presidential List; states lack legislative competence to sub-classify.
Article 341(2): Any inclusion in or exclusion from the list of Scheduled Castes can be done only by Parliament by law — states cannot add or remove castes, but (per Davinder Singh) may prioritise within the existing list.

Connection to this news: Karnataka's notification is a direct implementation of the Davinder Singh judgment. The state is not removing any caste from the Presidential List but redistributing the 15% quota internally among the 101 listed castes based on group-level backwardness data — precisely what the Supreme Court held is permissible.

Roster Point System and Representation

The roster point system is the mechanism by which state governments sequentially allocate reserved-category posts in a cadre or service to ensure proportional representation. Under it, specific post numbers in a recruitment cycle are earmarked for SC, ST, and OBC candidates in turn.

Roster points derive from the Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) framework and subsequent government orders.
With three sub-groups now sharing the 15% SC quota, the roster must allocate points proportionally to each sub-group, raising implementation complexity.
The state must reconcile the 5.25:5.25:4.5 ratio with recruitment cycles that involve different cadre strengths and varying post frequencies.
Carry-forward rules (backlog vacancies) will need sub-group-specific tracking to prevent one sub-group from absorbing another's backlog.

Connection to this news: Officials have flagged that integrating the three-tier internal quota into the existing roster system requires detailed guidelines, especially for services with small cadre sizes where fractional allocation creates rounding challenges.

Article 341 — Presidential List of Scheduled Castes

Article 341(1) empowers the President, in consultation with the Governor of the concerned state or UT, to specify castes, races, or tribes as Scheduled Castes for that state or UT by a public notification. Article 341(2) places modification of this list exclusively in Parliament's hands.

The Presidential List cannot be altered by state legislation or executive order — only a Parliamentary law can add or remove entries.
Karnataka's sub-categorization notification operates within the existing 101-caste Presidential List — it does not add or remove any caste, thus keeping it within the Davinder Singh framework.
This distinction between altering the list (Parliament's prerogative) and prioritising within the list (now permissible for states) is the central constitutional line drawn by the 2024 judgment.

Connection to this news: Questions about whether the "SC General" sub-category creates a de facto new classification will likely face legal challenge on this Article 341(2) ground; courts will examine whether it effectively excludes or disadvantages any Presidential-listed caste.

Key Facts & Data

Karnataka's total SC reservation: 15% of government posts and educational seats.
New formula notified (2026): Group A — 5.25% | Group B — 5.25% | Group C — 4.5%.
Previous formula: 6% : 6% : 5% (6:6:5 ratio, now withdrawn).
Number of SCs covered: 101 communities listed in Karnataka's Presidential Schedule.
Immediate recruitment: 56,432 government posts to be filled under the new formula.
Davinder Singh judgment date: 1 August 2024 (7-judge bench, 6:1 majority).
E.V. Chinnaiah judgment (overruled): 2004, 5-judge bench.
Constitutional provision for reservation in services: Article 16(4).
Article for Presidential SC list: Article 341 (modification requires Parliamentary law under Article 341(2)).
86th Amendment (2002): Added Article 21A (Right to Education) — not directly related but part of the same social justice constitutional matrix.
Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992): Capped total reservation at 50%, upheld OBC reservation, mandated exclusion of creamy layer (not applicable to SC/ST).