On 30th August, 2022 a bench comprising of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, A.S. Oka and Vikram Nath directed the Union Government to clarify its position on extending reservation benefits to Dalits who have converted to different faith. The said order was passed in response to a petition filed way back in the year 2004 by National Council of Dalit Christians seeking reservation benefits...
On 30th August, 2022 a bench comprising of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, A.S. Oka and Vikram Nath directed the Union Government to clarify its position on extending reservation benefits to Dalits who have converted to different faith. The said order was passed in response to a petition filed way back in the year 2004 by National Council of Dalit Christians seeking reservation benefits for Dalits who have converted to Christianity. It is interesting to note that in the year 2007 a report was submitted by the National Commission for Religious and Linguistic Minorities which advocated that reservation benefits should be extended to Dalits who have converted to Christianity. The Court has directed the Union Government to file its affidavit within 3 weeks' time and the hearing upon this issue will commence from 11th October, 2022.[1]
In the light of the above facts, it has become necessary to undertake a study upon the issue of conversion and caste and also upon the issue of reconversion.
Religious Conversion And Caste
One of the most complicated issues arising out of conversion is the caste status of the converted individual. The Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order 1950 states that "no person who professes a religion different from Hinduism shall be deemed to be a member of Scheduled Caste community."
[2]However, the said order was first amended in the year 1956 to include Sikhs and it was again amended in 1990 to include Buddhists. As a result, if a member of the Scheduled Caste Community converts into Christianity or Islam then he/she ceases to be a member of the Scheduled Caste Community. Thereby they cannot claim quota benefits guaranteed to the members of the Scheduled Caste Community under the Constitution.
In the case of Punjabrao v. Meshram[4] the Supreme Court of India was asked to decide whether the Scheduled Castes who have converted to Buddhism will enjoy the benefits of the Scheduled Castes. The petitioners argued before the Apex Court that under Article 25 Buddhists are recognized as Hindus. As a result, they should be given the quota benefits. But the Apex Court went for a literal interpretation and held that "the Scheduled Caste members who have converted to Buddhism will not enjoy the quota benefits." [5]
However, post the 1990 amendment the Scheduled Castes who have converted to Buddhism are entitled to avail the benefits of Scheduled Castes. As a result, the judgment is no longer a good law.[6] Over a period of time the Scheduled Caste members who have converted into any other religion except Sikhism and Buddhism have demanded quota benefits. However, the Court has refused to give them any kind of benefit.
In the case of Kailash Sonkar v Maya Devi[7] the question before the Court was that whether a person loses his caste after converting into different religion. The Apex Court ruled in this case that there is no loss of caste despite the fact the citizen converts in a different religion. Furthermore, in the case of Chatturbhuj Vithaldas Jasani v. Moreshwar Parshuram[8] the Court was asked to decide that by the act of conversion do the person loses the status of Scheduled Castes. The Court answered this question in negative and ruled that a Scheduled Caste won't lose his status even if he/she converts in a different religion.
As a result, the authors believe that the benefits given to the Scheduled Caste community must also be extended to those who have converted into religions like Islam or Christianity. The Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order 1950 in its current form violates Article 14 of the Constitution.
It is pertinent to note that in the state of Maharashtra Christians converted from Scheduled Caste are considered to be OBCs.[9] However it is time that the reservation benefits should be given to Scheduled Caste members of all religious communities because there is no loss of caste despite the fact the citizen converts in a different religion.
Issue Of Reconversion
The major question which arises out of reconversion is whether the members of the Scheduled Caste Community who have converted into different religion can avail the benefits if they reconvert back to Hinduism. The statutory law is silent on the aspect of reconversion. However, the Court vide its judgment has cleared the law on the complicated issue of reconversion.[10]
In most of the cases the court has rejected this claim. However, in certain cases the same was allowed. In the case of Rajagopal v Arumugum[11] the Court rejected the claim of a Christian convert who reconverted back to Hinduism in order to contest election from a constituency reserved for Scheduled Castes. The Court in this case opined that "by the virtue of converting into Christianity the person lost the status of Scheduled Caste. As a result, he cannot contest election from a place exclusively reserved for the members of Scheduled Caste community."[12]
However, the Court has held that in the issue of reconversion three factors need to be considered. They are; -
(i). The reaction of the religion and the caste from which the person has converted.
(ii). The intention behind conversion.
(iii). The rules of the religion in which the person has converted.[13]
Applying this test, the Court in the case of Kailash Sonkar[14] allowed a reconvert Scheduled Caste Lady to contest election from a reserved seat. The Court in this case observed that "there is no evidence that the parents of the lady were Christians. Furthermore, her marriage to a Hindu was welcomed by the members of the Hindu community. As a result, the person is entitled to claim benefit."[15]
Using the above-mentioned tests, the Court in the case of Guntur Medical College v Mohan Rao[16] rejected the claim of a Christian convert who reconverted back to Hinduism and demanded quota benefits. Justice P.N. Bhagwati observed that the reconversion will be successful only if the members of the caste accept him/her as a member. [17]
The authors believe that over a period of time the Courts in India has applied this reconversion test in a very inconsistent manner. As a result, the Court needs to change its approach.
Way Ahead
In the light of the above arguments, the authors believe that reservation benefit should be extended to all kinds of Scheduled Castes i.e., Scheduled Castes of Hindus, Muslim, Christian, Sikh or Buddhist. It is because even after conversion their societal status remains the same. As a result, it is necessary that they are given reservation benefits. The current law is in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. Therefore, in the opinion of the authors the Union Government should change its stance and amend the law or else the Court should strike it down for being arbitrary and discriminatory in nature.
On the aspect of reconversion, the authors believe that there is a lot of confusion because it has been left to the members of the society to decide that whether reconversion is acceptable to them or not. Only if the members of his/her old caste and religion accept him/her then the reconversion will be successful. This in the opinion of authors is problematic. The authors believe that if an individual has reconverted successfully as per the prescribed procedure, then the act of conversion should be treated successful
[1] SC Reservation for Converted Dalits: Supreme Court Asks Centre to Explain its Stand Within 3 weeks, Live Law (Sept. 5, 2022, 8:30 a.m.), https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-scheduled-caste-reservation-dalits-conversion-to-other-faiths-207968
[2] The Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order 1950.
[3]Ronojoy Sen, Articles of Faith: Religion, Secularism and the Indian Supreme Court (Paperback revised edition, Oxford University Press, 2019) 117.
[4]Punjabrao v. Meshram AIR 1965 SC 1179.
[5] Ibid.
[6]Ronojoy Sen, Articles of Faith: Religion, Secularism and the Indian Supreme Court (Paperback revised edition, Oxford University Press, 2019) 118.
[7]Kailash Sonkar v Maya Devi AIR 1984 SC 607.
[8]Chatturbhuj Vithaldas Jasani v. Moreshwar Parshuram (1954) SCA 395.
[9] Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud, Republic of Religion. (1st edition, Penguin Random House India, 2020) 41.
[10]Ronojoy Sen, Articles of Faith: Religion, Secularism and the Indian Supreme Court (Paperback revised edition, Oxford University Press, 2019)119.
[11]Rajagopal v Arumugum AIR 1969 SC 101.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ronojoy Sen, Articles of Faith: Religion, Secularism and the Indian Supreme Court (Paperback revised edition, Oxford University Press, 2019) 120.
[14]Kailash Sonkar vs Smt. Maya Devi AIR 1984 SC 600.
[15] Ibid.
[16]Guntur Medical College v Mohan Rao AIR 1976 SC 1904.
[17] Ibid.