In 2015 a man named Paramasivam, who identified as Hindu and belonged to a backward‑class community, converted to Islam and changed his name to Sameer Ahmed. After his conversion he applied for a community certificate that would allow him to claim reservation benefits under the state’s backward‑class quota. The local Tahsildar rejected his application, setting off a chain of legal challenges that would eventually reach the Supreme Court of India.
On March 9, 2024 the Tamil Nadu government issued a government order that sought to grant backward‑class certificates to seven specific categories of people who had converted from Hinduism to Islam. The order was intended to allow those converts to continue accessing reservation benefits in education and public employment that they had enjoyed before their change of faith. The move was framed by the state as a protective measure for individuals whose social backwardness originated in their Hindu caste identity.
Before the Supreme Court weighed in, the Madras High Court examined the Tamil Nadu government’s order. The High Court concluded that the state could not extend backward‑class status to persons who had left the Hindu social order. It quashed the March 2024 notification, holding that the benefit tied to Article 16(4) of the Constitution could not be claimed merely on the basis of pre‑conversion caste affiliation.
The case was heard by a bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Shree Chandrashekhar (also referred to as Sri Chandrashekhar).
The Tamil Nadu government filed a special leave petition challenging the Madras High Court’s decision. The case was heard by a bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Shree Chandrashekhar (also referred to as Sri Chandrashekhar). Senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Siddharth Luthra appeared on behalf of the state, arguing that social backwardness should survive a change of religion.
STORY | Converted Muslims can't claim quota benefits for backward class category based on earlier status: SC The Supreme Court on Thursday held that Hindus belonging to backward classes cannot claim quota benefits of that category after converting to Islam, saying backwardness suffered in the antecedent social order can't be carried forward. The court also said that a person professing a religion other than Hinduism, Sikhism, or Buddhism cannot be believed to be a member of a scheduled caste. A bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Shree Chandrashekhar dismissed the Tamil Nadu government’s plea against the Madras High Court order which held that a person converting to Islam can’t claim reservation under Backward Class (Muslim) category, solely on the basis of conversion. While upholding the high court order which had quashed the Tamil Nadu government’s notification to grant reservation to converted Muslims, the top court said it called for no interference. READ: https://t.co/dHj7fZuslf
On October 15, 2026 the Supreme Court delivered its verdict. The bench dismissed the Tamil Nadu government’s plea and upheld the Madras High Court’s order. In its judgment the Court quoted two key passages: first, that "No statutory benefit, protection, reservation, or other entitlement under Article 16(4) of the Constitution, the enjoyment of which is predicated upon a particular Hindu social order, can be claimed or extended merely on the basis of such antecedent membership after the person has converted to Islam, Christianity, or any other non‑Hindu social order," and second, that "A backwardness suffered in the antecedent social order cannot by itself be carried forward so as to confer upon him the status of a backward class in the region to which he has converted…"
The Court made clear that reservation benefits linked to caste identity are tied to the Hindu social system. Consequently, a person who was classified as a backward class or scheduled caste while Hindu cannot retain that classification after converting to Islam, Christianity, or any other non‑Hindu religion. The decision reinforces that Article 16(4) does not permit the transfer of caste‑based quotas across religious lines.
The ruling effectively nullifies the Tamil Nadu government’s attempt to grant backward‑class certificates to converts. It also aligns with earlier jurisprudence that persons professing religions other than Hinduism, Sikhism, or Buddhism cannot be considered members of a scheduled caste. While the decision was a setback for the state’s policy, it provides a uniform principle applicable across India: religious conversion severs the link between an individual’s former caste status and eligibility for reservation benefits.
As of the Supreme Court’s October 15, 2026 judgment, the legal position is settled: reservation benefits under Article 16(4) cannot be claimed by individuals who have changed their religion from Hinduism to Islam or any other non‑Hindu faith. The Tamil Nadu government’s March 9, 2024 order remains quashed, and any future attempts to extend caste‑based quotas to religious converts would need to confront this constitutional barrier.