The recent ruling Gaurav Kumar v. State of Bihar by the Patna High Court striking down the 65% reservation for backward classes has sparked a heated debate on the efficacy and legality of such affirmative action policies in India. On March 11, a division bench consisting of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Harish Kumar reserved its judgment after considering numerous writ petitions contesting the constitutionality of the increase in the quota from 50 percent to 65 percent for Backward Classes (BC), Extremely Backward Classes (EBC), Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) in educational institutions and government jobs.
After following
a caste-based survey report, which showed that there is a need for increased
representation of BC, EBC, SC, and ST communities, in 2023. Bihar government
issued gazette notifications to raise the quota for deprived castes from 50% to
65%. And later the Bihar Reservation Amendment Bill 2023 was unanimously passed
by the Bihar Assembly in November 2023 to implement this 65% quota. According to the bill quota for Extremely
Backward Classes (EBC) was raised from the existing 18% to 25%; for Backward
Classes (BC) from 12% to 18%; for Scheduled Castes (SC) from 16% to 20%; and
for Scheduled Tribes (ST), the quota has been doubled, from 1% to 2%.
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition was filed in the Patna High Court on November 27, 2023, challenging the decision of the Bihar Government wherein the Hon’ble Patna High Court scrapped the Bihar Reservation Amendment Act 2023 as ultra vires the Constitution and violative of the equality clause under Article 14, Article 15 and Article 16.
Analysis of the
Judgment
The petitioners challenging the reservation quota argued that it violated the fundamental right to equality as enshrined in the Indian Constitution. They contended that such a high percentage of reservation could lead to discrimination against other groups and compromise the merit-based selection process. The HC, in its judgment, stated that while affirmative action is essential for uplifting marginalized communities, the reservation policy should not infringe on the rights of other citizens. The court pointed out that a 65% quota was arbitrary and lacked a rational basis, leading to its rejection.
Referring to
the Indra Sawhney case to emphasize the manner in which a methodology was
evolved for the collection of data and scientific analysis of the same, the
bench said that
‘‘It found no such analysis having been
made of the data collected in the Caste Survey, though a massive exercise was conducted
by the government to survey the entire population of the State and the data
collated in a report”
The court also noted that the reservation increase was not based on a proportionate representation framework, which is required for reservation policies to align with constitutional principles. Although together with the 10% Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) quota, the bill has pushed total reservation to 75%, which is unconstitutional.
Reservation policies play a crucial role in uplifting marginalized communities and promoting social mobility. The Patna High Court ruling underscores the need to strike a balance between providing opportunities for the disadvantaged and maintaining merit-based selection processes. The rejection of the 65% reservation in Bihar may influence reservation policies in other states with similar quotas. Policymakers and legal experts must analyze the ramifications of this judgment on a national level to ensure the harmonization of affirmative action laws.
JURISEDGE
Share post:
The recent ruling Gaurav Kumar v. State of Bihar by the Patna High Court striking down the 65% reservation for backward classes has sparked a heated debate on the efficacy and legality of such affirmative action policies in India. On March 11, a division bench consisting of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Harish Kumar reserved its judgment after considering numerous writ petitions contesting the constitutionality of the increase in the quota from 50 percent to 65 percent for Backward Classes (BC), Extremely Backward Classes (EBC), Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) in educational institutions and government jobs.
Background
After following a caste-based survey report, which showed that there is a need for increased representation of BC, EBC, SC, and ST communities, in 2023. Bihar government issued gazette notifications to raise the quota for deprived castes from 50% to 65%. And later the Bihar Reservation Amendment Bill 2023 was unanimously passed by the Bihar Assembly in November 2023 to implement this 65% quota. According to the bill quota for Extremely Backward Classes (EBC) was raised from the existing 18% to 25%; for Backward Classes (BC) from 12% to 18%; for Scheduled Castes (SC) from 16% to 20%; and for Scheduled Tribes (ST), the quota has been doubled, from 1% to 2%.
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition was filed in the Patna High Court on November 27, 2023, challenging the decision of the Bihar Government wherein the Hon’ble Patna High Court scrapped the Bihar Reservation Amendment Act 2023 as ultra vires the Constitution and violative of the equality clause under Article 14, Article 15 and Article 16.
Analysis of the Judgment
The petitioners challenging the reservation quota argued that it violated the fundamental right to equality as enshrined in the Indian Constitution. They contended that such a high percentage of reservation could lead to discrimination against other groups and compromise the merit-based selection process. The HC, in its judgment, stated that while affirmative action is essential for uplifting marginalized communities, the reservation policy should not infringe on the rights of other citizens. The court pointed out that a 65% quota was arbitrary and lacked a rational basis, leading to its rejection.
Referring to the Indra Sawhney case to emphasize the manner in which a methodology was evolved for the collection of data and scientific analysis of the same, the bench said that
‘‘It found no such analysis having been made of the data collected in the Caste Survey, though a massive exercise was conducted by the government to survey the entire population of the State and the data collated in a report”
The court also noted that the reservation increase was not based on a proportionate representation framework, which is required for reservation policies to align with constitutional principles. Although together with the 10% Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) quota, the bill has pushed total reservation to 75%, which is unconstitutional.
Conclusion
Reservation policies play a crucial role in uplifting marginalized communities and promoting social mobility. The Patna High Court ruling underscores the need to strike a balance between providing opportunities for the disadvantaged and maintaining merit-based selection processes. The rejection of the 65% reservation in Bihar may influence reservation policies in other states with similar quotas. Policymakers and legal experts must analyze the ramifications of this judgment on a national level to ensure the harmonization of affirmative action laws.
You can access Jurisedge Recent Legal News Archives and our Jurisedge Blog for legal updates from around the globe.
For daily legal updates, follow our official Jurisedge channel on Instagram and LinkedIn and join our Telegram channel
Subscribe to our Law Exams Capsule India’s One and only Comprehensive Law Exam Preparation Journal
Readers may submit his/her blog for publication. Click Here to submit your Manuscript.
Disclaimer: The image for the blog has been taken for illustrative purposes only.
Share this:
Related