Discuss the evolution of the 'creamy layer' concept in OBC reservations in India. Examine the implications of the Supreme Court's 2026 ruling on the income/wealth test for candidates whose parents work outside government service.

The 'creamy layer' is a judicially evolved filter that excludes the socially and economically advanced among OBCs from reservation, so that benefits reach the genuinely backward. The Supreme Court's judgment of 11 March 2026 marks its latest turn, shifting the test from parental salary alone to the nature of the parental post.

Evolution of the concept

• Indra Sawhney (1992): upholding 27% OBC reservation under Article 16(4), the nine-judge Bench made exclusion of the creamy layer a constitutional requirement, capped reservation at 50% and barred reservation in promotions [1].
• 1993 DoPT Office Memorandum: operationalised the doctrine through a three-fold test — constitutional/service status, professional-cum-property status, and an income/wealth test that expressly excluded salary and agricultural income [2].
• Status-based exclusions: children of Group 'A' officers, of Group 'B' officers promoted before 40, and of two Group 'B' officers fall in the creamy layer [2].
• Rising income ceiling: revised in stages to Rs 8 lakh per annum in 2017, reflecting inflation and widening eligibility [3].

Implications of the 2026 ruling

• Ends salary-only exclusion: a parent's PSU or private-sector salary cannot by itself determine creamy-layer status; the post and status must be assessed alongside the income/wealth criteria [4].
• Equality restored: counting salary for non-government parents while exempting it for government servants was held to risk "hostile discrimination", offending Article 14 [4].
• Administrative burden: it requires an unsettled exercise in establishing equivalence between government and non-government posts.
• Remedial and transitional costs: the Court directed supernumerary posts for wrongly excluded candidates; the Centre has since sought clarification, as such posts address numbers but not seniority, promotion or cadre placement.

The ruling realigns the creamy-layer test with its original purpose — measuring social advancement, not merely earnings. Codifying transparent post-equivalence norms and a periodic review of criteria would let the executive implement it smoothly, advancing the substantive equality that Articles 14 and 16 promise.