Paswan targeted his colleague Jitan Ram Manjhi over the reservation issue and said that Manjhi should resign if his party wanted changes to the existing quota system.
The remarks have triggered speculation about differences within the NDA, especially at a time when the debate over reservation has once again taken centre stage amid anti-quota protests at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar.
The disagreement between the two Bihar leaders began earlier this week after Jitan Ram Manjhi’s Hindustani Awam Morcha (Secular), or HAM(S), supported the idea of sub-quotas for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) within the existing reservation system.
Manjhi’s son and Bihar minister Santosh Kumar Suman said the reservation policy needed to be reviewed to ensure that its benefits reached the most vulnerable and historically marginalised communities.
“We are not talking about ending reservation. We are talking about making reservation more just, effective and ensuring that it actually reaches those who are deprived,” Suman said.
What is the controversy about?
Both Chirag Paswan’s Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas) and HAM(S) are part of the NDA in Bihar as well as at the Centre. Manjhi belongs to the Mushahar community, which is considered among the most marginalised Dalit groups.
HAM(S) has argued that the benefits of reservation for Dalits have largely remained concentrated among a few communities, including Paswans and Ravidas, while several other communities continue to remain underrepresented.
Santosh Kumar Suman has also pointed out that not a single person from the Mushahar community has become an IAS officer.
The present controversy is linked to a major Supreme Court ruling delivered in 2024. In its judgment, the Supreme Court allowed states to sub-classify SCs and STs to ensure that reservation benefits could reach the more backward communities within these categories.
Last month, a petition was also filed in the Supreme Court seeking the exclusion of socially and economically advanced individuals from reservation benefits. The petition argued that affluent families within the SC and ST categories were monopolising the benefits of reservation.
Referring to the 2024 judgment, the plea said that four of the seven judges on the Constitution Bench had suggested extending the creamy layer principle to SCs and STs.
However, the Centre later told the Supreme Court in an affidavit that the creamy layer concept could not be applied to SCs and STs. The principle currently applies only to Other Backward Classes (OBCs).
‘Jitan Ram Manjhi should resign first’
Responding to HAM(S)’s stand, Chirag Paswan said that if the party wanted sub-quotas and the introduction of a creamy layer within SC reservation, then Jitan Ram Manjhi and his son, both ministers, should first resign.
“Those asking why there should not be a creamy layer should first give up the benefits of reservation. If Jitan Ram Manjhi believes in the creamy layer concept, he should first resign. His son should resign too,” Paswan told reporters.
Paswan, whose party has consistently opposed sub-quotas, said that all communities within the Scheduled Castes have remained united. He also argued that the Constitution does not provide for SC reservation to be decided on the basis of economic criteria.
According to Paswan, bringing sub-quotas or a creamy layer into SC reservation could weaken the larger objective of social justice.
“Otherwise, the way society will be divided, the fight for social justice will lose its meaning. Dalits would continue to face discrimination,” he said.
Paswan further maintained that if Manjhi still supported the idea of a creamy layer based on economic criteria, he should be the first person to step aside.