Patna High Court overturns 65% reservation for Backward Classes, EBCs, SCs & STs
- In Reports
- 12:45 PM, Jun 20, 2024
- Myind Staff
The Patna High Court has invalidated two laws enacted by the Bihar government that aimed to raise reservation quotas for Backward Classes, Extremely Backward Classes (EBC), Scheduled Castes (SC), and Scheduled Tribes (ST) from 50% to 65%.
Bar and Bench reported that the high court deemed The Bihar Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (Amendment) Act, 2023 and The Bihar (In admission in Educational Institutions) Reservation (Amendment) Act, 2023 as ultra vires and in violation of the equality clauses under Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution.
Chief Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice Harish Kumar delivered the judgment on a series of petitions challenging the legislative amendments introduced by the Bihar legislature in 2023. The court's decision came after petitions contested the constitutionality of the increased reservation quotas.
Under the leadership of Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, the Bihar government had taken the decision to expand reservation percentages for Backward Classes, EBCs, SCs, and STs through the amended legislation.
On November 9, the Bihar Assembly passed a Bill unanimously to raise reservation quotas for Backward Classes, Extremely Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes, and Scheduled Tribes from the current 50% to 65%.
With the addition of a 10% quota for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS), the legislation increased Bihar's total reservation to 75%, exceeding the 50% limit mandated by the Supreme Court.
The new Bihar Reservation Amendment Bill increased the quotas for various categories: Extremely Backward Classes (EBC) from 18% to 25%, Backward Classes (BC) from 12% to 18%, Scheduled Castes (SC) from 16% to 20%, and Scheduled Tribes (ST) saw their quota doubled from 1% to 2%.
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in court arguing that according to constitutional provisions, reservation is intended to ensure adequate representation for socially and educationally backward classes, not to be based on proportional population figures.
The PIL contended that the amendments violated fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, specifically the right to equal opportunity in government job appointments and protection against discrimination.
The petition challenged the legality of the three laws, asserting that they infringed upon constitutional guarantees and undermined principles of equality and non-discrimination in appointments to government posts.
Image source: Indian Express
Comments