Discuss the limits of State executive power in designing backward-class reservation, with reference to recent Supreme Court rulings.

Articles 15(4) and 16(4) allow States to reserve for backward classes. The 105th Amendment (2021) restored their right to keep their own SEBC lists under Article 342A(3) [1]. Recent rulings, however, show this power has firm limits. The State must work through data, law and notified communities, not through executive shortcuts.

Scope of State power

• State lists: After the 105th Amendment, States can prepare their own SEBC lists, which may differ from the Central List, but by law [1].
• Sub-classification: State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh (2024) lets States sub-classify reserved groups to reach the most backward [2].

Limits laid down by the courts

• No transfer of community status by G.O.: In Secretary to Government v. Sameer Ahamed N. (15 Oct 2026), the SC upheld the Madras HC, which had struck down Tamil Nadu's G.O. of 9 March 2024. That order let converts from BC, MBC, DNC and SC backgrounds claim the 3.5% BC Muslim quota. The Court held that conversion does not by itself make a person a member of any of the seven notified communities. Backwardness before conversion cannot by itself justify benefits in a different community [3].
• Evidence, not assumption: In Pattali Makkal Katchi (2022), the Court struck down Tamil Nadu's 10.5% Vanniyar internal quota because it lacked current quantifiable data [4].
• 50% ceiling: Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil (2021) struck down the Maratha quota. It found no exceptional circumstances to breach the Indra Sawhney cap and rejected the Gaikwad Commission's findings [5].
• Reasoned sub-classification: Davinder Singh requires sub-classification to rest on empirical data, not political expediency [2].
• SC status beyond State reach: Under Article 341, only Parliament can alter the SC list. States cannot extend SC status to converts.

Rationale behind the limits

• They protect the fixed share of communities already in a quota from dilution.
• They uphold Article 14 by testing every classification for reasonableness.

These rulings do not deny States a role in reservation. They require that role to rest on evidence and legislation. The way forward is to strengthen State Backward Classes Commissions and fund regular field surveys. Communities that prove backwardness, including convert groups, can then be notified by law. This keeps reservation true to substantive equality and SDG 10 (reduced inequalities).