New Delhi, Oct 15 In a significant verdict, the Supreme Court on Thursday held that a person who converts to Islam does not, by that act alone, become a member of any one of the notified Backward Class communities in the State.
A bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Shree Chandrashekhar dismissed a plea of the Tamil Nadu government against the Madras High Court order and said a person’s former caste or community status cannot automatically be transposed into the Muslim Backward Class category, nor can a private religious body conclusively determine such statutory entitlement.
“We are of the view that the impugned G.O. (government order) cannot be sustained and has rightly been quashed by the High Court. It creates an artificial route by which a person moves from a pre-conversion backward social order into a notified Muslim backward class without establishing the necessary social and legal link.
“Therefore, the declaration made by the High Court that the impugned G.O. is unsustainable in law calls for no interference,” it said.
The top court said that a person who converts from a Hindu social order to a non-Hindu social order cannot claim affirmative action under Article 16(4) of the Constitution merely on the basis of the social backwardness associated with his pre-conversion status and the backwardness suffered in the antecedent social order cannot, by itself, be carried forward so as to confer upon him the status of a backward class in the religion to which he has converted.
“No statutory benefit, protection, reservation or other entitlement under Article 16(4) of the Constitution, the enjoyment of which is predicated upon a particular Hindu social order, can be claimed or extended merely on the basis of such antecedent membership after the person has converted to Islam, Christianity or any other non-Hindu social order. Such conversion severs the legal foundation of an entitlement which is specifically conditioned upon membership of that Hindu social order,” it held.
In its 40-page order, the top court said by virtue of paragraph 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, a person who professes a religion other than Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism cannot be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste.
“Consequently, upon conversion to a religion not specified therein, such person ceases to possess the Scheduled Caste status attached to his antecedent caste and cannot claim any affirmative-action benefit of a backward class under Article 16(4) of the Constitution which is predicated upon membership of a Scheduled Caste,” it said.
Elaborating further, the bench said conversion to a non-Hindu social order does not, by itself, confer membership of any particular notified Backward Class community and a person’s pre-conversion caste or community status cannot, merely by reason of conversion, be transposed into membership of a distinct notified Backward Class community in the post-conversion social order.
“The social backwardness which formed the basis of the person’s pre-conversion status cannot, by itself, furnish the legal foundation for conferring upon him membership of a different notified Backward Class community after conversion,” it said.
The bench said conversely, where a person, after having converted from the Hindu social order to a non-Hindu social order, reconverts to Hindu social order, the question of his entitlement to affirmative action under Article 16(4) cannot be determined merely by reference to his antecedent status.
“Such entitlement would require an independent, fact-specific determination by the competent authority as to whether the original caste or social identity has genuinely revived upon reconversion and whether the person satisfies the applicable constitutional and legal requirements for such affirmative action,” it said.
It added that a community certificate is declaratory of and does not create or confer the status which it purports to recognise.
The state had contended that the object behind its order of March 9, 2024 was to ensure that persons belonging to socially and educationally backward communities are not deprived of reservation benefits solely on account of conversion to Islam.
The high court’s verdict came on a petition filed by one Sameer Ahamed, who converted from Hinduism to Islam in 2015, with the conversion being notified through a Gazette notification in 2016.
He subsequently married according to Islamic rites and sought a certificate identifying him as belonging to the “Muslim Lebbai” community to avail reservation benefits.
The state contended that it has the authority, based on the report of the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Commission, to issue backward classes (Muslim) community certificates to eligible persons who had embraced Islam among the backward classes, most backward classes, denotified communities and Scheduled Castes.
On June 25, the high court held that a person converting to Islam was not entitled to claim reservation under the Backward Class (Muslim) category solely on the basis of conversion and declared unconstitutional the Government Order issued on March 9, 2024.
It further observed that a person converting to Islam could only be treated as a Muslim and could not, by virtue of conversion alone, be classified as belonging to any specific notified Backward Class Muslim community for reservation purposes.
(PTI News)
