Madras High Court. File
| Photo Credit: K. Pichumani
A public interest litigation (PIL) petition has been filed in the Madras High Court seeking a direction to the Tamil Nadu Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) to ensure that the nominations filed for the 44 reserved Assembly constituencies in the State are scrutinised strictly in accordance with the Supreme Court’s latest judgment on Scheduled Caste status and religion. The apex court held that the SC status is strictly limited to individuals professing Hinduism, Sikhism, or Buddhism, and does not extend to those who have converted to other religions.
Also read: What did the Supreme Court rule on Scheduled Castes and religion?
Arjun Sampath of Indu Makkal Katchi had filed the PIL petition. He told the court that Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, makes it clear that only Hindus, Sikhs, and Buddhists could be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste and not those who convert to other religions. This position of law had been upheld by the Supreme Court, too, in a judgment delivered by it on March 24, 2026.
“A person cannot simultaneously profess and practice a religion other than the ones specified in Clause 3 of Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, and claim membership of a Scheduled Caste at the same time. A person who professes and practices such religion for personal, social, and spiritual purposes cannot in law, assert membership of a Scheduled Caste for the purpose of securing statutory benefits. The two positions are mutually exclusive and contrary to the Constitutional scheme,” the Supreme Court had observed.
The top court had also said: “No statutory benefit, protection, reservation, or entitlement under the Constitution or under any enactment of Parliament or State legislature that is predicated upon the membership of a Scheduled Caste can be claimed by or extended to any person who, by operation of Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, is not deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste. This bar is absolute and admits no exception.”
Therefore, the CEO was obligated to follow the law, more particularly Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, and its implication in the present election and issue appropriate directions to all the Returning Officers to accept nominations as per this legal provision, the PIL petitioner insisted.
Mr. Sampath also claimed to have reliably learnt that 90% of the candidates who had submitted their nominations so far in the 44 reserved constituencies for the Assembly elections this year, had converted to Christianity and therefore, are ineligible to contest in those constituencies.
Since the last day for filing of nominations is April 6, 2026, and the nominations will be taken up for scrutiny on April 7, 2026, the litigant told the court it is imperative for the CEO to issue necessary instructions to the Returning Officers to reject the nominations filed in reserved constituencies by candidates professing a religion other than Hinduism, Sikhism, or Buddism.
Published – April 02, 2026 12:57 pm IST
