The Madras High Court has struck down a Tamil Nadu Government Order that allowed persons from Backward Classes (BC), Most Backward Classes (MBC), Denotified Communities (DNC) and Scheduled Castes (SC) to obtain Backward Class (Muslim) status upon converting to Islam, holding the policy to be unconstitutional and contrary to binding judicial precedent.
A Division Bench of Justice G.R. Swaminathan and Justice P.B. Balaji was hearing a writ petition filed by Sameer Ahamed, born as Paramasivam, who converted to Islam in 2015 and sought a community certificate identifying him as Muslim Lebbai, one of the seven notified Backward Class Muslim communities in Tamil Nadu. His application had been rejected by the Tahsildar on the ground that he had converted to a religion and not to a caste or community.
During the pendency of the petition, the State relied upon G.O. (Ms.) No. 31 dated March 9, 2024, which permitted converts from BC, MBC, DNC and SC communities to be treated as BC (Muslim) and issued community certificates under one of the seven notified Muslim communities for reservation purposes. The Bench, however, suo motu examined the validity of the Government Order.
Conversion Does Not Mean Conversion Into a Backwards-Class Muslim Community
Tracing the legal position, the Court relied on the 1951 Division Bench judgment in G. Michael v. S. Venkateswaran, (1952) 1 MLJ 239, subsequently approved by the Supreme Court in Kailash Sonkar v. Maya Devi, (1984) 2 SCC 91; K.P. Manu v. Scrutiny Committee, (2015) 4 SCC 1 and C. Selvarani v. Special Secretary-cum-District Collector, (2024) 16 SCC 537. It observed that a person embracing Islam becomes “just a Muslim”, and his place in Muslim society cannot be determined by the caste to which he belonged before conversion. The Bench observed:
“
“As held by the Division Bench of the Madras High Court more than 75 years ago, upon conversion to Islam, one becomes a Muslim. The Hon’ble Division Bench used the expression ‘just a Mussalman’. He cannot be pigeonholed into any particular sect or community which can be only by virtue of one’s birth therein.”
Rejecting the State’s defence that the Government Order merely preserved reservation benefits for persons who already belonged to reserved categories before conversion, the Bench held that the executive could not override binding judicial precedents through an executive order. “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 further noted that the seven communities notified as BC (Muslim), including Labbais, Rowthars, Marakkayars, Sheiks and Syeds, are communities acquired by birth and not by conversion. It held that the Government’s assumption that a person could convert into any one of these communities was legally untenable.
The Bench also criticised the policy for clubbing together SC, BC, MBC and DNC converts into a single BC (Muslim) category, observing that the approach ignored the distinct constitutional treatment accorded to these classes.
‘Innovation’ Is Both Unconstitutional and Un-Islamic
The Court went on to examine the issue from the standpoint of Islamic theology, referring to Quranic injunctions on equality and the Prophet Muhammad’s farewell sermon. It observed that Islam envisages an egalitarian society where social hierarchy has no place. The court observed:
“
“We have no option but to conclude that only to undo the judgments of this Court, has the Government come out with an innovation that is not only unconstitutional but also un-Islamic.”
Declaring the government order unconstitutional, the High Court upheld the Tahsildar’s rejection of the petitioner’s application for a BC (Muslim) community certificate and dismissed the writ petition. Summing up its conclusion, the Bench held:
“
“We accordingly declare that the said G.O. is unconstitutional… 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.”
