Caste System Leads To Perversion Of Constitutional Goals: Madras High Court Orders Action Against Caste-Named Societies

A Single Bench of Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy observed, “If we perpetuate caste, it inevitably results in a breach of fraternity within society, leading to ill feelings and enmity among groups. The fact that it spreads like cancer even among school children underscores this issue. Thus, the very presence of the caste name in society promotes disharmony, hatred, enmity, and ill will among various castes.”

The Court added, “No name associated with a caste or sub-sect should be included in it. As long as they retain their caste name in the title of the association or society and aim to promote or perpetuate caste solely having membership within the caste or sub-sect, the said society is pursuing an unconstitutional goal of perpetuating cast…”

The Petitioners were represented by Senior Advocate N. Murali Kumaran, while Advocate General P.S. Raman appeared for the Respondents.

Brief Facts

A batch of writ petitions was filed by three societies registered with Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 t specific reliefs concerning the internal affairs of their respective societies, such as interference in elections, renewal of registration, and approval of general body decisions. All three societies were registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975, and shared a common feature: they were formed explicitly for the benefit of a particular caste, bore caste-identifying names, and restricted membership accordingly.

One of the Petitioner Societies South Indian Senguntha Mahajana Sangam, in its Memorandum of Association, declared its primary object as the upliftment of the Sengunthar community, and explicitly limited membership to genuine members of that caste. Similar language and restrictions were present in the other two societies, including The Poor Educational Fund, which confined membership to Catholic Gavaras, Balijas, Telagas of Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, and Puducherry.

Reasoning of the Court

The Court noted that when the matters came up for consideration, a preliminary question had to be decided whether these societies that perpetuate caste could be registered at all. “Given the concerning reality that many of these associations are also operating schools, colleges, and educational institutions under the name of caste, can the caste names of these schools and educational institutions continue?” the Court added.

Refusing to entertain the writ petitions, the Court said, “Law will not be static; the march of law will always continue to consider the needs of society. Seventy-five years after the adoption of the Constitution of India, caste discrimination and fanaticism has recently reached alarming levels.”

The Court observed that while casteism has long been a problem, its recent manifestations in schools and colleges, children forming caste gangs, engaging in violence, and bringing weapons, illustrate that caste discrimination has reached alarming levels. “Second, children are equated to gods, their hearts so pure and free from misgivings or discrimination. However, that is changing. Pristine innocence is now contaminating. School children wear different coloured armbands, form groups based on caste, and bring knives and weapons in their school bags, attacking their fellow students,” the Court added.

The Court referred to the decision of the Apex Court in Ashoka Kumar Thakur Vs. Union of India and Others (2008) wherein it was categorically held that casteless society is the constitutional goal and perpetuation of caste is against the constitutional goal.

The Court acknowledged that individuals from the same caste may come together to pursue legitimate social objectives, which in itself is neither prohibited nor discouraged. However, it noted that when such associations are formed solely for caste members and carry the caste name, they cross into unconstitutional territory.

Noting the inaction by the Inspector General of Registration of Societies and the subordinate officials, the Court observed, “The inaction on the part of the Inspector General of Registration of Societies and the subordinate officials, who only show compliance on paper with this Court's order while violating their own commitments and failing to take action against these caste associations, not only contravenes the order of this Court but also constitutes a huge disservice the constitution and every day inaction increases caste order and defeats the constitutional goal.”

The Court further held that private colleges and schools, whether run by these organisations, other trusts, or even the Government, cannot directly or indirectly carry caste-based names.

Consequently, the Court disposed of the petitions, with the following directions:

“i. The petitioners/their societies shall approach the Jurisdictional Registrars and submit the relevant forms,

(a) changing the name of the society/association by dropping the caste/sub-sect name;

(b) amending the goals from perpetuating/proliferation caste/sub-sect;

(c) amending the membership bye-law not making caste as a criteria and upon the forms being furnished, the same shall be taken on file and dealt with and approved as per the rules;

ii. Once they have submitted the above, they will be entitled to approach this Court again for any relief(s) for consideration of the relief(s) on their merits;

iii. The Inspector General of Registration shall issue directions and all the jurisdiction Registrars of Societies shall forthwith draw a list of these societies that have caste/sub-sect as part of their names, caste perpetuation/proliferation as their goal and membership from among caste members and require them to comply with the following :

(a) Dropping Caste/Sub-Sect name from their Society name;

(b) Amending their goal from perpetuation/proliferation of caste;

(c) Amending there membership clauses in the by-laws etc., from making caste/sub-sect as a criterion and thus comply with Circular No.1 of 2024. If the said societies do not comply, then treat their activity as unlawful and cancel their registration as per Section 38 of the Tamilnadu Societies Registration Act, 1975, and their assets be dealt with in the manner known to law.

iv. The above exercise in paragraph (iii) above shall be commenced within three months from the date receipt of the web copy of the order and shall be completed as expeditiously as possible in any event within 6 months therefrom;

v. In case these societies run any private or aided schools, colleges or other educational institutions, it should be ensured that no board depicting the caste name either directly or indirectly in any manner is mentioned in the campus of the school or in its records;

vi. In case there are caste appellations in the names of the institutions, notice must be issued to the institutions to give up the names of the caste within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the web-copy of this order, and the names should be changed and if they fail to comply, steps to be taken to de-recognize the institutions and the students to be transferred to some other recognised institution. The said exercise shall be completed within the academic year 2025-2026, failing which, the students should be transferred to other institutions in the academic year 2026-2027;

vii. The same exercise shall be done with reference to the schools/institutions that are run by another individual or Trust, also ensuring that there are no case appellations/names.

viii. The Government shall remove the caste names (Kallar Reclamation, Adi-Dravidar Welfare, etc.) as prefixes or any other caste names as suffixes in the school and hostel names, and they shall be referred only as Government schools and hostels followed by their place of location. If the donor’s name is mentioned in the name of the school and hostel, the name of the donor alone shall be mentioned after removing the caste prefix or suffix associated with the name of the donor or their family.”

Cause Title: South Indian Senguntha Mahajana Sangam v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors. (W.P.Nos.4563, 5465 & 4994 of 2025)

Appearance:

Petitioners: Senior Advocate N. Murali Kumaran, V.R. Kamalanathan; Advocates R. Manibarathi, P. Rajendran, S. Sathish Rajan

Respondents: Advocate General P.S. Raman; Additional Advocate General J. Ravindran; Senior Advocates Dakshayani Reddy; Special Government Pleader U. Baranidharan; Government Advocate K. Karthik Jaganath, R. Sasikumar; Advocate P. Rajan

Amicus Curiae: Advocate A. Rahul

Click here to read/download Order