Mumbai, April 14 (IANS) The ruling and opposition parties have taken strong objection to the Maharashtra government’s decision to extend the deadline for submitting statements, objections or opinions regarding Justice Anant Badar Committee’s report on sub-categorisation of Scheduled Caste reservations to April 30, even though the report itself has not been made public.
The demand for the release of the Justice Anant Manohar Badar Committee report, specifically its quantified data, has become a central point of contention in Maharashtra’s political discourse as the April 30, 2026, deadline approaches.
A single-member committee, appointed under the chairmanship of Justice Anant Manohar Badar (Retired Judge, Patna High Court), had submitted its report to the government on March 16, 2026, regarding the sub-categorisation of Scheduled Caste reservations.
The panel was tasked with examining the issue after the Supreme Court, in an August 1, 2024, ruling, allowed states to undertake sub-classification within Scheduled Caste reservations.
Following this, a committee was established under the chairmanship of the Chief Secretary via a Government Resolution dated April 10, 2026, to invite objections, opinions, and statements on this report and to conduct hearings.
Previously, the deadline for interested parties to register their opinions and objections via email was April 15, 2026.
Former social justice minister and currently NCP MLA Rajkumar Badole has been a prominent voice, arguing that inviting public suggestions without releasing the report is illogical.
He maintains that the community cannot provide meaningful objections if they do not know the empirical basis (quantified data) the committee used to justify sub-categorisation.
Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi founder Prakash Ambedkar, critical of the government’s timing, demanded transparency to ensure that sub-categorisation does not become a tool for “divide and rule” or “social engineering” without a scientific, data-driven foundation.
He warned that moving ahead without appropriate preparation and in haste will lead to discontent among the people and might result in protests.
NCP-SP spokesperson Sunil Mane remarked that, while taking such a major decision, it was highly inappropriate to suddenly issue a Government Resolution and seek suggestions and opinions via email.
He said that to provide suggestions, the policy and the related report must be publicly accessible. He questioned on what basis the government was making this decision if empirical data was not available.
Multiple organisations representing the 59+ Scheduled Castes in Maharashtra have raised objections. Their primary concern is the 15-year gap since the last census.
They are questioning the source of the “quantified data” mentioned in the report, arguing that in the absence of a fresh caste census, any data used by the Badar Committee might be speculative or outdated. Bahujan Samaj Party (Nagpur Unit) leaders, including Aniket Kuttermare, have publicly questioned the government’s intent, suggesting that the timing (around Ambedkar Jayanti) and the short initial window for feedback were politically motivated rather than aimed at genuine reform.
Legal experts are demanding that the report be placed in the public domain to ensure it meets the Supreme Court’s “creamy layer” and “relative backwardness” criteria. They argue that any decision made on a “secret report” will likely be struck down by the courts during judicial review.
The ruling and opposition parties, along with various social organisations, are not just seeking the report’s recommendations, but also the empirical data, methodology, and clarification on the creamy layer. They want to know the specific numbers showing which sub-castes have benefited most from the 13 per cent reservation and which have been left behind.
They also want clarity on how the Badar Committee assessed representation in government jobs and education without a recent census, and how the report defines the “creamy layer” within the Scheduled Caste category.
Social Justice Minister Sanjay Shirsat acknowledged that the initial feedback timeframe was too short, leading to the deadline extension to April 30, though the full text of the report remains restricted to government committees, such as the one led by Chief Secretary Rajesh Agrawal.
He confirmed the extension but did not answer questions about why the report has not been made public.
In Maharashtra, neo-Buddhists, largely from the Mahar community within the Scheduled Castes, have historically dominated the discourse around Scheduled Caste politics.
The proposed sub-categorisation is seen by observers as an attempt to consolidate support among Hindu Scheduled Caste communities and possibly to compromise the unity of the Dalit vote bank, especially after the BJP’s setback in the 2024 Lok Sabha polls.
Political observers further said that by championing sub-classification, the BJP-led Mahayuti is directly courting the Matang community and other smaller Scheduled Caste sub-castes who feel marginalised by the current system.
This is an attempt to create a “rainbow coalition” of smaller Dalit groups to counter the solid opposition-leaning neo-Buddhist vote.
For the Maha Vikas Aghadi, this is an attempt to claw back Dalit support after the 2024 elections, where a large section of the Dalit vote shifted towards it.
(Sanjay Jog can be contacted at sanjay.j@ians.in)
–IANS
sj/dan