Critically evaluate whether income should remain the primary criterion for identifying the creamy layer among OBCs, given the need for periodic revision and sub-categorisation.

The creamy layer test, which grew out of Indra Sawhney (1992), keeps socially advanced OBC families out of reservation. The 1993 DoPT framework puts the status test (parents' post) first and adds an income/wealth test. In March 2026 the Supreme Court held that creamy layer status cannot be decided solely on parental income [1]. This suggests income should be a supporting test, not the main one.

Case for income as the primary criterion

• Objective and easy to administer: an income figure is simple to verify, while matching posts across thousands of employers is not.
• Fills gaps in the status test: many private-sector jobs have no government grade to compare with, so salary is often the only visible sign of affluence.
• Scarce seats: the 27% quota is limited, and every seat taken by a well-off OBC family is lost to a poorer one.

Case against

• Backwardness is social, not just economic: reservation under Art. 15(4)/16(4) is meant to remedy social backwardness. Income is only one sign of social advancement.
• Unequal treatment: the Court found it unconstitutional to judge children of PSU and private employees by salary while judging children of Group C/D government staff by post [1].
• A fixed limit that is not revised: the ₹8 lakh ceiling has not changed since 2017 [2]. In 2025 the Parliamentary Committee on Welfare of OBCs called revision the "need of the hour", but the Ministry said no proposal was under consideration [3]. With inflation, the limit gets tighter every year without any decision being taken.

Linkage with periodic revision and sub-categorisation

• Status test needs post equivalence: the Cabinet's equivalence norms for PSUs, banks and insurers [4] are a working model. They still need to cover autonomous bodies and private jobs.
• Sub-categorisation: the income test only removes the top layer. It cannot stop a few dominant OBC castes from taking most of the benefits. The Justice Rohini Commission submitted its report on this in 2023 [5], and it is still awaiting action.

Income works best as a supporting filter inside a status-first test, not as the primary criterion. The way forward is to:

• complete post equivalence within a deadline;
• index the ceiling so it is revised on a fixed cycle;
• act on the Rohini Commission's report.

Together, these would make reservation reach the most backward OBCs, in line with the substantive equality promised by Articles 14–16.