Share of Backward Classes in the Judiciary

T. Chiranjeevulu, IAS (Ret), Founder President BCIF(BC Intellectuals Forum)

Indian democracy stands on three fundamental pillars: the Legislature, the Executive, and the Judiciary. Among them, the judiciary functions as the backbone of democracy, entrusted with crucial responsibilities such as upholding the rule of law, protecting citizens’ rights, and safeguarding the basic structure of the Constitution.

However, a fundamental question arises: What is the role and share of Bahujan communities, who constitute more than 90% of our country’s population within this crucial institution?

Do Backward Classes (BCs), Scheduled Castes (SCs), and Scheduled Tribes (ST) not deserve meaningful participation in the administration of justice?

Historical Dominance and Structural Exclusion -From the time of the freedom movement to the present day, the judicial sphere has remained firmly dominated by upper-caste elites. This dominance is visible both among advocates and within the higher judiciary. This is not merely a problem of recruitment, but a structural injustice that directly contributes to the denial of social justice.

While reservations exist in lower judiciary appointments at the district level, there is no reservation policy in the appointment of judges to High Courts and the Supreme Court. As a result, Bahujan participation at decision-making levels has remained largely symbolic.

Bahujans today are capable of understanding the law, but are systematically denied the opportunity to interpret and administer it. The collegium system has become a closed circuit, where judges belonging to dominant castes repeatedly select candidates from their own social backgrounds. Consequently, social justice remains absent even at a minimal level, and opportunities for BCs, SCs, and STs continue to remain a mirage.        Inequality Reflected in Data(1950–2022)

1.    Supreme Court Judes -  Appointments from Telangana  (1950–2022)

(From the Hyderabad State, Andhra Pradesh, and Telangana High Courts put together)

16 judges were elevated to the Supreme Court:

 • Reddys: 7 • Kammas:3  • Brahmins:2 • Velama 1, Raju 1, Muslim 1,Others 1  

• BC / SC / ST: Zero

 

2.     Chief Justices of High Courts (42 total) • Upper Castes: 39

 • Brahmins: 13 • Reddys: 5 • Kammas: 2 • Upper castes from other states: 19

 • BCs: Only 3

• From Telangana Region : Only one  by name Justice Komurayya Garu from the     Kummari (potter) community of Karimnagar district . Recruited in Earstwhile Nizam Sate.

 

• SC/ST: Nil

 

3.     High Court Judges (1950–2022)-Out of 204 judges:

• Brahmins: 50 • Reddys: 37 • Kammas: 21 • BCs: 32 • SCs: 7 • STs: 2

 • From other states: 55

SOURCE- Justice Sri Eshweriaha   article

 

 Stark Reality - Despite BCs, SCs, and STs together forming over 90% of the population, their representation in the judiciary is below 20%. This reality stands in direct contradiction to the constitutional vision of social justice. To date, not a single ST   judge has been appointed to the Supreme Court. Even today, out of 33 Supreme Court judges, only two belong to the B.C Community.

 

 

 

Recent High Court Appointments (2018–2025)

According to data provided by the Union Ministry of Law and Justice in Parliament on 31 July 2025

 

Total Judges Appointed 743

1	Total	OC	OBC	SCs	ST's
2	743	610	93	23	17
3	%	82.30%	12.5%	3%	2.20%

Women Judges         105      14%

 

This data conclusively exposes systemic exclusion, not lack of merit.

 

The Myth of “Lack of Qualified Candidates” -The long-standing argument that BCs, SCs, and STs lacked educational qualifications no longer holds true. Today, there is a substantial pool of qualified, experienced legal professionals from Bahujan communities. Yet, opportunities are deliberately denied.

Judiciary as “State” - Under the Constitution-  Under Article 12, the judiciary falls within the definition of “State”. This position was affirmed in the Kesavananda Bharati case by Justices Mathew and Hidayatullah. When reservations are implemented across all branches of the State, excluding the higher judiciary becomes an unjust and tragic anomaly.

 Need for Constitutional Reform In 2024- Rajya Sabha MP  Sri Wilson from Tamilnadu  introduced a private  Bill seeking reservations for OBCs, SCs, STs, and minorities in  higher judicial  appointments. This proposal firmly recognized the necessity of ensuring social representation in the higher judiciary.

 Way Forward • Replace the collegium system with an Independent Judicial Commission to

•       Ensure transparent, accountable, and socially inclusive appointments

•       Enact a constitutional amendment to implement reservations in the  higher judiciary

•       Fixed quota for  social representation in higher  judicial appointments.

 

 

 Social justice is not   a charity—it is a constitutional obligation.

Judges who pronounce verdicts on the lives of Bahujans must emerge from   the Bahujans only. That alone ensures true social justice.

 From the thoughts of   B. R. Ambedkar,