A fresh rift appears to be emerging within the NDA over reservation, with Union Ministers Chirag Paswan and Jitan Ram Manjhi publicly trading barbs over demands to review the existing quota system for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
The confrontation escalated on Saturday after Paswan, whose Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas) has consistently opposed sub-quotas within SC reservation, said Manjhi should resign if he supports the introduction of a creamy layer. Manjhi’s Hindustani Awam Morcha (Secular) has backed sub-classification within the existing SC and ST quotas. The dispute comes as reservation has once again become a major political issue, with anti-quota protests being held at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar. “We are not talking about ending reservation. HAM(S) has argued that the benefits of Dalit reservation have become concentrated among a handful of communities, including Paswans and Ravidas, while several other Dalit groups remain underrepresented. Suman has also highlighted the lack of representation of the Mushahar community, to which Manjhi belongs, saying that not a single person from the community has become an IAS officer. Both HAM(S) and Paswan’s LJP (Ram Vilas) are NDA allies at the Centre and in Bihar. The debate intensified last month after a petition was filed in the Supreme Court seeking the exclusion of socially and economically advanced individuals from SC and ST reservation benefits. At present, the principle applies to OBCs. “Those asking why there should not be a creamy layer should first give up the benefits of reservation. If Jitan Ram Manjhi believes in the creamy layer concept, he should first resign. Paswan maintained that reservation for SCs is rooted in social discrimination rather than economic status. He warned that introducing an economic criterion could weaken the purpose of reservation and deepen divisions within Dalit communities. “Otherwise, the way society will be divided, the fight for social justice will lose its meaning. Paswan also argued that if the constitutional basis of reservation is to be changed, Parliament should take up the matter and amend the Constitution. “Everyone wants to make their own political bread. I have only two things to say. First, there is a constitutional basis. “They should resign. They do not understand what Santosh is saying. Congress MP Akhilesh Prasad Singh also weighed in on the dispute between the two NDA allies, stressing that reservation must remain within the constitutional framework. He added that if the constitutional basis of reservation needed to be changed, Parliament should debate and amend the Constitution rather than alter the principle through other means. The public clash between two Union ministers from the same alliance has now brought the reservation debate back into the NDA’s own ranks, with both sides insisting that their positions are aimed at protecting the interests of disadvantaged communities. (With agencies’ inputs)
Manjhi’s son and Bihar minister Santosh Kumar Suman argued that the system needs to be reviewed so that reservation benefits reach the most vulnerable communities. The current political row is linked to a landmark Supreme Court ruling in 2024, when a seven-judge Constitution Bench allowed states to sub-classify SCs and STs to ensure that the benefits of reservation reach more backward communities within these categories. The plea cited the 2024 judgment and argued that four of the seven judges had suggested extending the creamy layer principle to SCs and STs.
We are talking about making reservation more just, effective and ensuring that it actually reaches those who are deprived,” Suman said. The Centre, however, has told the Supreme Court in an affidavit that the creamy layer concept cannot be extended to SCs and STs. Taking a firm stand against the proposal, Paswan said those seeking a creamy layer within SC reservation should first give up the benefits themselves. His son should resign too,” Paswan told reporters. Dalits would continue to face discrimination,” he said. If we want to change it, then let us change the Constitution,” he said. Manjhi hits back Manjhi rejected Paswan’s criticism and said the proposed changes were aimed at ensuring that reservation benefits reach poorer and more marginalised sections. That is why they are making such statements, which could result in people being deprived of the benefits of reservation,” Manjhi said. “There is a Constitution in this country, and reservation should be provided in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution,” Singh said.
The disagreement began earlier this week after HAM(S) called for sub-quotas within the existing reservation system for SCs and STs.
In another statement, Manjhi defended the demand for sub-classification, saying such a division was necessary in the wider public interest. However, we maintain that this division is essential in the broader public interest. Paswan, meanwhile, sought to defend his position by pointing to concerns raised by Congress and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi over continuing discrimination against Dalits.
Because of this stance, “People will end up being deprived of the benefits of reservation.
Since he does not care about our poor people, he ought to resign,” he said. He said that if social discrimination remains a concern, the answer cannot be to shift the basis of SC and ST reservation from social factors to economic criteria. “Regarding reservation, we have clearly said that its foundation has always been social discrimination, so, discussing reservation on an economic basis goes against the Constitution,” Paswan said.
