Issue-
Whether a person who is born in a Backward Class (BC), Most Backward Class (MBC) or Denotified Community (DNC) and subsequently converts to another religion, particularly Islam, loses his original reservation status or is entitled to retain it.
Position settled by the Madras High Court
In Sameer Ahamed v. District Collector & Others, W.P.(MD) No.7127 of 2022, dated 25.06.2026, the Madras High Court held that a person who converts to Islam cannot claim to belong to any of the seven notified Backward Class Muslim communities such as Labbai, Rowther, Syed, Sheik, etc. The Court declared G.O.(Ms.) No.31, BC, MBC & Minorities Welfare Department dated 09.03.2024 unconstitutional and held that a convert becomes only a Muslim and cannot obtain a BC(Muslim) community certificate.
However, the Court did not decide the distinct question whether such a convert loses the reservation status attached to his original BC/MBC/DNC birth community.
Legal Principles Emerging from Supreme Court Decisions
- Caste is determined by birth; religion is a matter of choice.
In Mohammed Siddiq v. Darbara Singh Guru, (2016) 11 SCC 617, the Supreme Court held that:
A person may change his religion or faith, but cannot change the caste into which he was born, since caste has an inextricable linkage with birth.
Thus, conversion changes only religion and not the person’s birth identity. This legal position alone is reiterated by the Madras High Court in the recent judgement.
- Scheduled Castes lose reservation because of a special constitutional provision
In C. Selvarani v. Special Secretary-cum-District Collector, (2024) 16 SCC 537, the Supreme Court reiterated that under the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1964, a person can claim Scheduled Caste status only if he professes Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism. Consequently, upon conversion to Islam or Christianity, the person loses Scheduled Caste status.
Therefore, the loss of Scheduled Caste reservation is not because caste disappears upon conversion, but because the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order expressly imposes a religious qualification. It has been framed in 1964 and not after 2014.
This principle is also reflected in:
- C.M. Arumugam v. S. Rajgopal, (1976) 1 SCC 863;
- Soosai v. Union of India, (1985) 1 SCC 590.
- Conversion does not erase birth caste
The Supreme Court in:
- Kailash Sonkar v. Maya Devi, (1984) 2 SCC 91; and
- K.P. Manu v. Scrutiny Committee, (2015) 4 SCC 1,
held that caste is a birth-based social identity and that, upon reconversion and acceptance by the community, Scheduled Caste status can revive. These decisions reinforce the principle that conversion does not obliterate the person’s birth caste or social identity.
Absence of Similar Law for BC/MBC/DNC
Unlike Scheduled Castes, there is no constitutional provision, Presidential Order or statutory enactment providing that a person belonging to a Backward Class, Most Backward Class or Denotified Community loses such status merely because he changes his religion.
This distinction is fundamental.
The Constitution has consciously made religion a condition for the continuance of Scheduled Caste status by virtue of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1964. However, it has not imposed any similar restriction in respect of Backward Classes, Most Backward Classes or Denotified Communities. The absence of such a provision is deliberate.
Constitutional Position
Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution permit reservation for socially and educationally backward classes of citizens. These provisions do not restrict reservation to persons professing any particular religion.
Consequently, in the absence of an express statutory disqualification, there is a strong constitutional basis to contend that a person born in a BC/MBC/DNC community continues to retain the reservation attached to that birth community, notwithstanding conversion to another religion.
Distinction to be Maintained
The following distinction is crucial:
- A convert cannot claim membership in a new birth-based Muslim community such as Labbai, Rowther, Syed or Sheik merely because of conversion.
- However, it does not automatically follow that the convert loses the reservation attached to his original birth-based BC/MBC/DNC community, particularly when there is no law providing for such forfeiture.
Conclusion
The Madras High Court has settled only the issue that conversion to Islam does not confer the status of a notified Backward Class Muslim community.
However, the broader question—whether a person born in a BC/MBC/DNC community forfeits his original reservation upon conversion—remains legally unresolved. The Supreme Court’s decisions in Mohammed Siddiq, Kailash Sonkar, K.P. Manu, and C. Selvarani indicate that caste is a birth-based identity and that Scheduled Caste reservation is lost only because of the specific mandate of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1964. Since no analogous constitutional or statutory provision exists for BC/MBC/DNC communities, a substantial constitutional argument remains available that such persons continue to retain their original reservation status notwithstanding conversion. This precise issue awaits authoritative determination by the Supreme Court possibly in the case of U. Akbar Ali v. State of Tamil Nadu , which is pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.