New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday took a strong stance against a woman, identified as a Christian by the Tamil Nadu government, for allegedly claiming to practicing Hinduism solely to secure job benefits reserved for Scheduled Castes (SC).
A Bench comprising Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice R Mahadevan ruled that converting or reconverting to a religion merely to claim reservation benefits undermines the purpose of the reservation policy, which aims to uplift socially and economically backward communities.
“If the purpose of conversion is primarily to avail reservation benefits without genuine adherence to the religion, it cannot be permitted.
Extending such benefits to individuals with ulterior motives would defeat the social objectives of reservation and amount to fraud on the Constitution,” the Bench observed.
The verdict came while dismissing an appeal by C. Selvarani, who challenged a January 2023 Madras High Court ruling.
Selvarani had claimed that she belonged to the Valluvan caste of Hindu religion and sought reservation benefits for a clerk position under the SC category. However, the Tamil Nadu government, after verification, rejected her claim.
The Supreme Court upheld the findings of the State, which revealed that Selvarani was born as a Christian, and her parent’s marriage was registered under the Indian Christian Marriage Act. Her baptism and regular church attendance confirmed her Christian faith.
There was no evidence of her reconversion to Hinduism through any ceremony, public declaration, or association with Hindu practices.
“In India, a secular country, every citizen has the right to freely practice and profess a religion. However, dual claims on religious identity cannot be allowed. The appellant cannot continue to identify as Hindu for reservation benefits after baptism and active practice of Christianity,” the Court stated.
The Bench emphasized that caste identification is lost upon conversion to Christianity, as the religion does not recognize caste systems. It criticized Selvarani’s attempt to misuse the reservation policy, stating that such acts harm the integrity of constitutional provisions meant to empower marginalized communities.
“Conversion to a different religion must stem from genuine inspiration and belief, not from a desire to exploit legal benefits. In this case, the appellant’s active practice of Christianity contradicts her claim of being Hindu,” the judgment read.
Senior Advocate N.S. Nappinai, along with advocates V. Balaji, Asaithambi MSM, Atul Sharma, C. Kannan, Nizamuddin, B. Dhananjay, and Rakesh K. Sharma, appeared for Selvarani. Advocates Aravindh S., Akshay Gupta, Abbas B., and Tharane S. represented the State of Tamil Nadu.
The Supreme Court’s ruling reaffirms the principle that the reservation system is intended for genuine beneficiaries and should not be misused through fabricated claims.
UNI
