Discuss the evolution of the 'creamy layer' concept in India's reservation policy and examine the challenges in operationalising the income/wealth test.

The 'creamy layer' denotes the socially and economically advanced sections within the Other Backward Classes who are kept outside the 27% central quota so that reservation reaches the genuinely disadvantaged [1]. Its journey from a judicial safeguard to an administrative income calculation explains why the test remains contested today.

Evolution of the concept

• Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992): upheld 27% OBC reservation under Article 16(4) but made exclusion of the creamy layer mandatory [1].
• DoPT Office Memorandum of 8 September 1993 operationalised it through six categories — holders of constitutional posts, Group A/B officers, professionals, property holders and an income criterion [1].
• Rising income ceiling: ₹1 lakh (1993) → ₹2.5 lakh (2004) → ₹4.5 lakh (2008) → ₹6 lakh (2013) → ₹8 lakh with effect from September 2017, unrevised since [2].
• Equivalence of posts in PSUs, banks and insurance institutions with government grades was approved in 2017, so that children of lower-category employees retain benefits [4].
• Union of India v. Rohith Nathan (11 March 2026): the Supreme Court held creamy layer status cannot rest on income alone; the status and category of the parent's post are essential [5].

Challenges in operationalising the income/wealth test

• Definitional ambiguity: whether salary and agricultural income are counted; the Parliamentary Standing Committee recommended excluding both [3].
• Static ceiling: the ₹8 lakh limit has not moved since 2017 despite inflation; the Committee urged raising it to ₹15 lakh [3].
• Incomplete equivalence mapping of private, PSU and bank posts to government grades, leaving determination arbitrary [4][5].
• Verification burden: certification depends on multiple state authorities, creating inconsistency across candidates.
• Retrospectivity: the Centre pleads a "cascading effect" on appointments already settled, affecting all categories [5].

The creamy layer thus needs a periodically indexed, status-plus-income formula rather than a frozen income figure. A transparent equivalence table, digital income verification and prospective application with targeted relief would reconcile administrative stability with the equality promise of Articles 15 and 16.