Chief Justice of India D. Y. Chandrachud on October 13 said a curative petition against the apex court’s judgment holding the Maratha reservation law unconstitutional will be listed for consideration in due course. The Chief Justice was responding to an oral mentioning for an early listing of the curative plea.
A five-judge Review Bench had in July 2021 refused to reconsider the judgment. It had held, in a majority view, that the Centre alone was empowered to identify socially and educationally backward classes (SEBC) to include them in the Central List for claiming reservation benefits.
“The grounds taken in the review petition do not fall within the limited ground on which review petition can be considered. The various grounds taken in the review petition have already been dealt with in the main judgment. We do not find any sufficient ground to entertain this review petition. The review petition is dismissed,” the five-judge Bench led by Justice (now retired) Ashok Bhushan had recorded in a short order.
In May 2021, the court had declared the Maharashtra State law which provides reservation benefits to the Maratha community, taking the quota limit in the State in excess of 50%, as unconstitutional. The court had also refused to revisit its 1992 Indira Sawhney verdict which fixed the ceiling limit for reservation at 50%.
The May 2021 judgment had found no “exceptional circumstances” or “extraordinary situation” in Maharashtra which required the State government to break the 50% ceiling limit to bestow quota benefits on the Maratha community.
“We have found that no extraordinary circumstances were made out in granting separate reservation of Maratha Community by exceeding the 50% ceiling limit of reservation... The Marathas are in the main stream of the national life. It is not even disputed that Marathas are politically dominant caste,” Justice Bhushan, who authored the lead opinion on the point of the validity of the Maratha law, noted.
The Supreme Court had struck down the findings of the Justice N. G. Gaikwad Commission which led to the enactment of Maratha quota law and set aside the Bombay High Court judgment which validated the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act of 2018.
The High Court had, in June 2019, reduced the quantum of reservation for Marathas from the 16% recommended by the Gaikwad Commission to 12% in education and 13% in employment. The Supreme Court concluded that even the reduced percentages of reservation granted by the High Court were ultra vires.
In fact, the Supreme Court had held that a separate reservation for the Maratha community violates Articles 14 (right to equality) and 21 (due process of law).
However, Justice S. Ravindra Bhat had held a “different” opinion about the validity of the 102nd Constitutional Amendment. Justice Bhat had held that the Centre alone was empowered to identify socially and educationally backward classes (SEBC) for the Central List. This opinion had led to the review pleas.
“The President (that is the Central government) alone, to the exclusion of all other authorities, is empowered to identify SEBCs and include them in a list to be published under Article 342A (1), which shall be deemed to include SEBCs in relation to each State and Union Territory for the purposes of the Constitution,” Justice Bhat had observed.
Justice Bhat had concluded that the States could only make suggestions to the President or the statutory commission’s concerned for inclusion, exclusion or modification of castes and communities to be included in the List.
COMMents
SHARE