AP govt tells SC: Quota for Muslims not religion based

NEW DELHI: Andhra Pradesh government on Friday contended before the Supreme Court that the law providing four per cent reservation to Muslims in professional and educational institutions was not on religious lines but based on careful identification of Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) among the community.
    
"The Act providing four per cent reservation to the socially and educationally backward Muslims is based on careful identification of the SEBCs of Muslims based on best expertise available in the field ...," the state government said in an affidavit.
    
The apex court, while stopping any further admissions under the controversial law on September 28, had sought response of the Andhra Pradesh government on sub categorisation of SEBC Muslims for extending the benefit of reservation.
    
Defending the legislation, the state government said "neither the Act nor the report of the Commission based on which an Ordinance was promulgated and subsequently the Act was passed can be termed as religious based".
    
The Andhra Pradesh government has accepted the report of the P S Krishnan rpt (Krishnan) Commission which contended that bulk of Muslim SEBCs were lost sight of over several decades, whereas other groups had the benefit of reservations for over 30 years, including Scheduled Castes converted to Christianity.
    
"The sub categorisation of SEBCs of Muslims is not based on religion alone. But it is on account of their delayed and recent inclusion on their relative backwardness vis-à-vis existing SEBC and therefore, the same is lawful," the affidavit said.

    
"That not to give reservations to the SEBCs of Muslims having regard to their backwardness would be a denial of equal opportunity based on religion alone," the affidavit added.
    
The petition filed by T Murlidhar Rao and K Sriteja has contended that providing reservations exclusively to the Muslim community on religious lines was violative of Articles 15(1) and 16(2) of the Constitution.
    
However, justifying the law, the state government said a careful analysis of various reports would clearly indicate that the means adopted to identify the SEBC of Muslims have been largely guided by consistent elements of various court judgements of the past, notably of the apex court in Indira Sawhney case.
    
The state government said the contention that the law was violative of Articles 15(1) and 16(2) of the Constitution was untenable and liable to be rejected.
    
The petitioners have challenged the Andhra Pradesh High Court order declining to stay the law which came in force by July 6 notification this year by which it provided four per cent reservations to several segments within the Muslim community by treating them as Backward Classes.
    
The petitioners have alleged the state government has excluded those sub-groups among Muslims from the list, who have a very small presence in the state and the entire exercise of identifying the SEBC among Muslim was foul of the Constitution as it was a case of reservation for a community.
    
However, the state government said it was incorrect to say that the 10 communities were non-existent as the Krishnan Committee report categorically dealt with each of them and there was evidence to show they exist in varying numbers.
    
Those who have been excluded are Sayyad, Mushaik, Mughal, Pathans, Irani, Arab, Bohra, Khoja, Cutchi-Memon, Jamayat and Navayat.

The High Court had refused to stay the law after the state government submitted that the issue relating to reservation for OBCs was pending before the apex court and hence no order be passed till the matter was adjudicated by the Constitution Bench.
    
The petitioners had submitted that if this was the stand of the state government before the High Court, then the apex court's March 29 interim order staying the implementation of the controversial law providing 27 per cent quota to OBCs, would also apply in the present case.
    
The petitioner said it was contended before the High Court that the matter before the apex court was different where the Constitution bench was examining the 93rd Amendment and providing quota to OBCs in Central Educational Institutions.
    
They alleged this was the third attempt by the state government to provide quota to Muslims as the earlier two were struck down by the High Court.
    
The petitioners have questioned the present law, contending that when the appeal against the earlier one was pending before the apex court, how could the state government come out with a fresh one.
    
The state government's June 21, 2005 ordinance granting five per cent reservation to Muslims in education and jobs by declaring the entire community as backward class was struck down by the High Court as illegal and unconstitutional.
    
The appeal against it is pending in the apex court.