Reservation To Converted Muslims Is Unconstitutional, Says Madras HC
The Christian missionaries as well as Islamic preachers harangued through decades and centuries that their religions offer social equality unlike Hinduism which has caste as its inherent feature.
Total Views |
Chennai, June 26: In a landmark decision, the Madras High Court, Wednesday, declared Tamil Nadu government’s 2024 order to grant reservation to converted Muslims as unconstitutional. The ruling came in a case, filed by one Sameer Ahmed, who had converted to Islam in 2015. He had sought reservation under the category of backward class Muslim. The High Court held that a Hindu who converts to Islam becomes "just a Mussalman," and that his or her status within the Muslim community is not determined by the caste to which the individual previously belonged.
The Christian missionaries as well as Islamic preachers harangued through decades and centuries that their religions offer social equality unlike Hinduism which has caste as its inherent feature. Having taken such a stand for effecting conversions, it is disingenuous to claim that there is hierarchy in Islam also. In our respectful view, categorising certain sects as Backward and the remaining as Forward is antithetical to Quranic injunctions. Islam seeks to establish an egalitarian society. Everyone is equal in the eye of God. There is no social hierarchy," the Court observed.
A Division Bench comprising Justices G.R. Swaminathan and P.B. Balaji held that the Government Order was inconsistent with the constitutional framework and consequently struck it down.
“As a corollary, we hold that a convert to Islam cannot claim the status of Backward Class Muslim. He is only a Muslim and that’s all there is to it,” the Court said.
The case arose from a petition filed by Sameer Ahamed, formerly known as Paramasivam, who was born into a Hindu family in Tamil Nadu's Thoothukudi district. After converting to Islam in 2015, he changed his name, solemnised his marriage in accordance with Islamic rites, and subsequently applied for a community certificate identifying him as a "Muslim Lebbai," one of the seven communities recognised as Backward Class Muslims under the Tamil Nadu government's reservation policy. His application was rejected by the jurisdictional Tahsildar, prompting him to approach the Madras High Court.
Before the High Court, the petitioner relied on the Government Order dated March 9, 2024, which provided that individuals belonging to reserved categories, who converted to Islam could be issued community certificates classifying them under one of the seven notified Backward Class Muslim communities in the State. The State government defended the Government Order, contending that it had been issued pursuant to the recommendations of the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Commission. It further argued that the policy merely ensured the continuity of reservation benefits for individuals who had already been entitled to such benefits prior to their conversion to Islam.
ALSO READ: India Is Not A Dharmashala
The Division Bench, however, rejected the State's submissions and declined to uphold the validity of the Government Order. In its judgment, the Division Bench observed that the legal position on the issue had been settled as early as 1951 in G. Michael v. S. Venkateswaran, wherein the Madras High Court held that a Hindu who converts to Islam becomes "just a Mussalman," and that his or her status within the Muslim community is not determined by the caste to which the individual previously belonged.
The Bench further noted that this principle has subsequently received the approval of the Supreme Court in later decisions, thereby reinforcing the proposition that caste identity under Hindu social structure does not automatically persist upon conversion to Islam.
“When the proposition laid down by the Hon’ble Division Bench is holding the field, it cannot be undone by issuing a mere Government Order,” the Court said.
The Court strongly observed that the executive could not override binding judicial precedents through a government order, stating that such an exercise would undermine the rule of law. It further found the Government Order to be arbitrary, as it indiscriminately classified converts from different reserved communities under the single category of Backward Class Muslims.
“Just for the sake of ensuring that the converts to Islam continue to enjoy some form of reservation benefit, such a bunching has been done by the State Government,” the Court observed.
The Court further observed that while Muslim society is also socially stratified into different communities, membership of these communities is determined by birth and cannot be acquired merely through conversion.ALSO READ: When Comrades Discover Democracy
“A convert to Islam cannot claim the status of Backward Class Muslim. He is only a Muslim and that’s all there is to it.”
Madras High CourtThe Court concluded that while an individual may convert to Islam, such conversion does not confer membership of a particular Muslim caste or community for the purposes of reservation. It held the Government Order to be "not only unconstitutional but also un-Islamic," observing that the foundational principle of Islam is equality rather than social hierarchy.
The Christian missionaries as well as Islamic preachers harangued through decades and centuries that their religions offer social equality unlike Hinduism which has caste as its inherent feature. Having taken such a stand for effecting conversions, it is disingenuous to claim that there is hierarchy in Islam also. In our respectful view, categorising certain sects as Backward and the remaining as Forward is antithetical to Quranic injunctions. Islam seeks to establish an egalitarian society. Everyone is equal in the eye of God. There is no social hierarchy," the Court observed.
Consequently, the Court upheld the Tahsildar's order rejecting the petitioner's application for a Muslim Lebbai community certificate and disposed of the writ petition.