SC bars converted Muslims from claiming TN’s 3.5 pc BC(M) sub-quota, upholds Madras HC order

In a major setback to the Tamil Nadu government, the Supreme Court on Thursday (October 15) ruled that persons who convert to Islam cannot claim reservation benefits under the state’s Backwards Class Muslim BC(M)) category solely on the basis of their pre-conversion caste or social backwardness.

A Bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Shree Chandrashekhar dismissed the state government’s Special Leave Petition and affirmed the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court’s June 25 judgment that struck down a March 2024 government order as unconstitutional.

The apex court held that a person converting from the Hindu social order to a non-Hindu religion cannot claim affirmative action under Article 16(4) of the Constitution merely on the strength of social backwardness associated with their earlier status. Backwardness suffered in an antecedent social order cannot, by itself, be carried forward to confer membership of a different notified backwards-class community after conversion.

Tamil Nadu's 3.5 per cent BC(M) sub-quota

Tamil Nadu provides a separate 3.5 per cent sub-quota for Backward Class Muslims within its overall 30 per cent Backward Classes reservation (the state’s total reservation stands at 69 per cent). This was introduced through the Tamil Nadu Backward Class Christians and Backward Class Muslims (Reservation of Seats in Educational Institutions Including Private Educational Institutions and of Appointments or Posts in the Services under the State) Act, 2007, under the then DMK government led by M. Karunanidhi. It was based on recommendations of the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Commission and earlier data from the Ambasankar Commission. A parallel 3.5 per cent quota for Backward Class Christians was later withdrawn.

Also Read: HC upholds TN Assembly Speaker's decision accepting resignations of 6 AIADMK MLAs

The BC(M) category covers seven notified Muslim communities whose membership is determined by birth: Ansar, Dekkani Muslims, Dubekula, Labbais (including Rowthers and Marakkayars), Mapilla, Sheik and Syed. Ordinary converts do not automatically fall within these communities.

2024 government order extended quota eligibility

On March 9, 2024, the Tamil Nadu government issued Government Order (Ms) No. 31. It directed that persons belonging to Backward Classes, Most Backward Classes, Denotified Communities and Scheduled Castes who converted to Islam could be treated as BC(M) and issued community certificates under one of the seven notified communities, thereby retaining access to the 3.5 per cent sub-quota. The order followed a recommendation of the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Commission and was aimed at ensuring that socially and educationally backward persons did not lose reservation benefits solely because of conversion.

Sameer Ahamed's community certificate dispute

The matter reached the courts through a petition filed by Sameer Ahamed (formerly Paramasivam), a resident of Thoothukudi district born to a Hindu family. He converted to Islam in 2015 (notified in the government gazette in 2016), married under Islamic rites, and sought a community certificate as “Muslim Lebbai” (Labbai). The Tahsildar of Kayathar rejected the application, stating that conversion was to a religion, not a caste. While the writ petition was pending, the 2024 GO was issued, giving the claim a fresh legal basis.

High Court struck down order in June 2026

On June 25, 2026, a division bench of Justices G.R. Swaminathan and P.B. Balaji of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court struck down the GO. Relying on the 1951/1952 Madras High Court judgment in G. Michael v. S. Venkateswaran (later approved by the Supreme Court), the bench held that a Hindu converting to Islam becomes “just a Mussalman” and cannot claim membership of any specific Muslim community such as Labbai, Rowther or Marakkayar, which are birth-based social groups and not mere theological sects.

Also Read: Madras HC questions denial of permission for RSS route march in Tamil Nadu

The court declared the GO unconstitutional, arbitrary (for placing SC converts on the same footing as BC converts), and contrary to settled judicial precedents. It observed: “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 High Court also described the order as “unconstitutional and un-Islamic.”

SC rules conversion does not confer BC(M) status

The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court’s central conclusion while elaborating the constitutional foundation. It held that conversion alone does not make a person a member of any of the seven notified Backward Class Muslim communities in Tamil Nadu, and that pre-conversion caste or community status cannot be transposed into the post-conversion social order.

Also Read: ‘Not maintainable’: Madras HC junks Stalin’s plea for recounting in Kolathur

Private religious bodies, the Court added, cannot conclusively determine statutory entitlement to reservation. Referring to the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, the bench observed that a person who professes a religion other than Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism ceases to be a member of a Scheduled Caste and therefore cannot claim benefits dependent on that status.

Even in cases of reconversion to Hinduism, the Court clarified that eligibility must be determined through an independent, fact-specific assessment of whether the original social identity has genuinely revived, rather than by automatic reference to antecedent caste status. The bench noted that conversion severs the legal foundation of an entitlement specifically conditioned upon membership in the Hindu social order.

Ruling deals setback to state govt's policy

The ruling is a clear judicial rebuff to the state government’s attempt to expand the BC(M) sub-quota to converts through an executive order. The 2024 GO was issued under the DMK government and framed as a measure of social justice to protect converts from losing affirmative-action benefits. With the Supreme Court upholding the High Court’s quashing of the order, the state has lost its attempt to treat such converts as members of the notified BC Muslim communities.

Immediate formal reactions from the ruling party and opposition parties were still emerging at the time of reporting, as the judgment was delivered only hours earlier. However, the decision is widely described as a major setback for the Tamil Nadu government.

Rights groups had challenged High Court verdict

Earlier, after the High Court verdict, rights groups had criticised the Madras High Court ruling and urged the state to seek a larger-bench reference rather than a straightforward appeal.

Opposition parties that have traditionally opposed religion-based sub-quotas or “appeasement” policies are expected to welcome the judgment as upholding the principle that reservation must rest on social and educational backwardness within the constitutional framework, not on religious conversion alone.

Also Read: TN MLA resignations and re-election test limits of anti-defection law

The judgment reaffirms long-standing judicial principles on the non-transferability of caste status upon conversion and the birth-based nature of the notified BC Muslim communities in Tamil Nadu. It leaves open the possibility of future policy or legislative measures, provided they are supported by contemporaneous data and do not simply transpose pre-conversion status. For now, converted Muslims cannot avail the 3.5 per cent BC(M) sub-quota on the strength of their former caste background.