"Why no revision for 8 years?": Manickam Tagore demands Centre revise income limit of OBC non-creamy layer

New Delhi [India], May 21 (ANI): Congress MP Manickam Tagore on Wednesday slammed the Centre for not making an upward revision in the income limit to determine the OBC non-creamy layer, which currently remains at Rs 8 lakh.
The Congress MP said that this "neglect" affected "lakhs of families who are denied rightful access to education and job opportunities due to an outdated income cap".
"Despite multiple demands, the income limit to determine the OBC non-creamy layer remains at Rs 8 lakh -- unchanged since 2017. As per the response from the Minister of Social Justice (dated 13 May 2025), there is no proposal under consideration even now. Why is there continued discrimination towards BCs? Inflation and income levels have risen over the years, but the criteria for availing OBC reservation benefits have not been updated. This neglect affects lakhs of families who are denied rightful access to education and job opportunities due to an outdated income cap. Why is the Government ignoring OBC welfare? Why no revision for 8 years?" Tagore posted on X.

Despite multiple demands, the income limit to determine the OBC non-creamy layer remains at ₹8 lakh — unchanged since 2017. As per the response from the Minister of Social Justice (dated 13 May 2025), there is no proposal under consideration even now.

Why is there continued… pic.twitter.com/FcSXY3dhYA

— Manickam Tagore .B🇮🇳மாணிக்கம் தாகூர்.ப (@manickamtagore) May 21, 2025

Meanwhile, in a matter pertaining to reservations for OBCs in Maharashtra, the Supreme Court orally remarked that reservations in the country are akin to a railway journey, where those who are already inside the train are now resisting the inclusion of others.
"Reservation business in this country has become like a railway. Those who have entered the coach, entered the bogey, they don't want anyone else to enter.", the top-court judge said, implying that such are the claims made by the petitioner before it.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankarnarayanan, appearing for the petitioner, argued that the assessment of social backwardness is relevant for constitutional reservations under Articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India. However, he contended that this criterion has nothing to do with regard to electoral reservations, which, as per the Supreme Court's ruling in the Krishnamoorthy case, require a separate determination of political backwardness.
At this juncture, Justice Surya Kant remarked, "When you follow the principle of inclusivity, the States are bound to identify more classes. There will be social backwards class, politically backwards class, and economically backwards classes. Why should they (any class) be deprived of the benefit? Why should it be confined to one particular family or group?"
The Court was hearing a plea filed by one Mangesh Shankar Sasane, who raised the issue of OBC reservation granted in elections merely on the basis of social backwardness without ascertaining political backwardness of the concerned persons. (ANI)