The court noted that certain parameters laid down by the apex court in Mandal Commission judgement will have to be taken into account by the Tamil Nadu Backward Class Commission if the government wanted to exceed the 50% ceiling.
The Supreme Court today asked the governments of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka to revisit the laws providing quota in excess of 50% to reserved categories in government jobs and educational institutions.
The apex court, however, allowed the continuation of its interim orders for one more year concerning the two states by which it had made operational the 69% quota in Tamil Nadu and restricting Karnataka from exceeding the 50% ceiling as laid down in the Mandal Commission case.
A bench comprising chief justice SH Kapadia and justice KS Radhakrishnan and justice Swatanter Kumar pronounced separate orders by disposing of two batch of petitions and made it clear that it was not expressing any opinion on the validity of the laws.
The first batch of petitions had challenged the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of seats in Educational institutions and of appointment or posts in the services under the state) Act, 1993, which provided 69% reservations.
The second batch of petitions had challenged the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Seats in Educational Institutions and Appointments or Posts in the Service under the State) Act, 1994, which provided 73% reservations.
While dealing with the petitions on Tamil Nadu quota law, the bench said government will place all quantifiable data available with it before the state Backward Class Commission which will revisit the issue of reservation.
Meanwhile, the Bench said the interim orders passed by it protecting 69% quota in jobs and appointments will continue for a year.
The court noted that certain parameters laid down by the apex court in Mandal Commission judgement will have to be taken into account by the Tamil Nadu Backward Class Commission if the government wanted to exceed the 50% ceiling.
In the case of Karnataka, which through an interim order, was restrained from exceeding the 50% quota, the state was also asked to re-examine its law based on the fresh data if it wanted to provide reservations beyond the ceiling.
while disposing of the petitions, the bench noted that since the matter was brought before the apex court, there had been two amendments in the Constitution pertaining to Artices 15 and 16 providing reservations for OBCs in higher educational institutions and quota for backward classes in promotion respectively. Since the academic year of 1994-95, the apex court had been every year passing directions to Tamil Nadu government to create additional seats for open category students in educational institutions until the petition challenging the 69% reservation benefits was decided.
The petition filed in 1993 by an NGO had challenged the Constitutional validity of the 69% reservation provided by the state on the ground that the apex court had ruled in the Indra Sawhney (Mandal case) that the percentage of reservation should not exceed more than 50%.
The Act providing 69% reservation to different social castes was also placed under the 9th Schedule of the Constitution to make it beyond judicial scrutiny.
However, a Constitution Bench in 1997 had held that even those laws placed under the 9th Schedule were liable to be struck down as illegal if it violated the basic features of the Constitution.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}