Maharashtra had passed a law creating a special category of Socially and Economically Backward Class (SEBC) on November 30, 2018, to accommodate a 16 per cent quota in government jobs and educational institutions for the Marathas, a highly influential and socially and politically dominant community that was classified as a ‘forward caste’ by two state-level commissions, the Bapat Commission and the Saraf Commission, in the late 1990s. The Bombay High Court still approved the law, but cut the quota to 13 and 12 per cent, respectively, in June 2019. But the new law came months after the Centre had, through an amendment to the Constitution on August 11, 2018 (widely known as the 102nd amendment), empowered the President to identify the SEBC in the states. On May 5, a five-member constitution bench of the Supreme Court referred to said amendment while striking down the HC ruling on Maratha reservation and discarding the Maharashtra SEBC Act, 2018.
The SC made it clear that the states can award reservation to a community only after the President notifies it as backward in consultation with the governor. “By introduction of Articles 366 (26C) and 342A through the 102nd amendment to the Constitution, the President 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)...” the SC ruled. However, the SC allowed the states to determine the extent of reservation and make specific policy in the spirit of “cooperative federalism”.
Seven states have breached the SC-mandated cap of 50% but most face legal challenges; only Tamil Nadu (69%) and Andhra Pradesh (66%) have higher quotas—their laws predate the 102nd amendment.
But then the apex court threw another spanner in the works by reiterating that the 50 per cent ceiling on quotas, as fixed by it in 1992, cannot be breached. The ceiling was fixed in 1992 in the Indra Sawhney vs Government of India case verdict. If the Maratha reservation had come into force, Maharashtra would have had 72 per cent quota for different communities. The state has already implemented the 10 per cent reservation for economically backward classes as fixed by the Union government in 2018. The Maharashtra government had argued that the increase in reservation limit would qualify as an extraordinary circumstance since the backward classes make up 85 per cent of the population in the state while the reservation limit is 50 per cent. The SC, however, disagreed. “The Marathas are a dominant forward class and are in the mainstream of national life. The above situation is not extraordinary,” stated the verdict.
The SC ruling has also sparked a debate on the future of reservations. Former attorney general Shrihari Aney says the ruling will have repercussions in other states too. “In the given situation, the state government will have to decide how to accommodate the Marathas in the 50 per cent reservation limit,” says Aney. Former CM Prithviraj Chavan argues that the Indra Sawhney verdict is not sacrosanct since the Union government itself has raised the quota limit to 60 per cent by adding 10 per cent reservation to economically backward classes. “The Centre should bring more clarity on the subject,” he say.
Sambhajiraje Chhatrapati, a descendant of Chhatrapati Shivaji, announced that the first Maratha morcha (rally) would commence from Kolhapur district on June 16.
The Marathas make up 33 per cent of the state’s population and are a crucial votebank. It will be interesting to see how Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray, once a strong advocate of reservations to only the economically weaker sections, addresses the issue.
Comments
Post a Comment