NEW DELHI: Holding that lists of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and socially and educationally backward classes for providing reservation are not "sacrosanct and unalterable", the Supreme Court on Wednesday said the beneficiaries should be revised by the government by removing those who have become affluent over the years and adding those who remain needy and require assistance.A five-judge bench of Justices Arun Mishra Vineet Saran , M R Shah and Aniruddha Bose said benefits of reservation were being availed by some communities over the last 70 years and they have become well off economically and socially. It said benefits have not trickled down to all sections and there is dissatisfaction within the ‘reserved’ class which can be addressed by revising the list.The court pronounced its verdict striking down an Andhra Pradesh government order that only Scheduled Tribes will be appointed teachers in scheduled areas. The court said the state order violates the 50% cap set by it on reservations in government jobs and educational institutions.The verdict can lead to a fresh controversy over reservation though the demand to use the creamy layer concept to remove some from the list of beneficiaries among the SCs and STs has been aired before. The creamy layer definition exists for OBCs though it is subject to revision and is often a contested matter.In 2018, the SC ruling rolling back mandatory arrest in the law on atrocities against Dalits and tribals had led to nationwide protests."Now there is a cry within the reserved classes. By now, there are affluents and socially and economically advanced classes within Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. There is voice by deprived persons for social upliftment of some of the Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but they still do not permit benefits to trickle down to the needy. Thus, there is a struggle within, as to worthiness for entitlement within reserved classes of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes," the bench said.Agreeing with the contentions that the government is required to revise the lists, the bench said, "It can be done presently without disturbing the percentage of reservation so that benefits trickle down to the needy and are not usurped by those classes who have come up after obtaining the benefits for the last 70 years or after their inclusion in the list."Referring to the SC's Indra Sawhney judgement, the bench said the government is duty-bound to undertake such an exercise as "the Constitution empowers Parliament under Article 341(1) to include or exclude from the list of Scheduled Castes any caste, race or tribe. Identical provisions in relation to the inclusion of Scheduled Tribes are provided in Article 342(1), and Parliament's power to amend is provided in Article 342(2). Similar provisions are contained with respect to socially and educationally backward classes in Article 342A," it said."It was least expected from the functionary like the government to act in aforesaid manner as they were bound by the dictum laid down by this court in Indra Sawhney (case) and other decisions holding that the limit of reservation not to exceed 50%. There was no rhyme or reason with the state government to resort to 100% reservation," it said.