Centre moves SC, wants BC reservation order reviewed

Centre moves SC, wants BC reservation order reviewed

The Centre has moved the Supreme Court seeking review of the May 5 majority verdict which took away the power of state governments to declare socially and educationally backward classes (SEBC) for grant of quota in jobs and admissions.

New Delhi, May 14

The Centre has moved the Supreme Court seeking review of the May 5 majority verdict which took away the power of state governments to declare socially and educationally backward classes (SEBC) for grant of quota in jobs and admissions.

The Centre has maintained that the 102nd Constitution amendment did not take away the power of the state governments to identify and declare SEBC and the two provisions that were inserted did not violate the federal structure.

Maratha quota

  • The Centre’s plea comes days after the apex court ruled that only the President has the power to identify and add a community to the socially and educationally backward classes’ list
  • The SC had unanimously set aside Maharashtra law granting quota to Marathas and refused to refer to the 1992 Mandal verdict putting a cap of 50% on reservation to a larger bench

A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan had unanimously set aside Maharashtra law granting quota to Marathas and refused to refer to the 1992 Mandal verdict putting a cap of 50 per cent on reservation to a larger bench.

The bench, in its 3:2 majority verdict, had ruled that the 102nd Constitutional amendment, which also led to setting up of the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC), gives exclusive power to the Centre to identify and declare SEBC, as only President can notify the list.

All five judges of the bench, however, had held the amendment as valid and said it did not affect the federal polity or violate the basic structure of the Constitution.

The petition for the review of judgement, which was filed on Thursday, has sought an open court hearing into the matter and also stay of the majority verdict on the limited aspect of the amendment till the plea is decided.

The Centre, in its plea, has said that majority verdict had upheld the validity of Article 342A, but in doing so, the bench had interpreted that the provision denudes the states from exercising the power which they undoubtedly had for identifying and declaring SEBC in their respective states. — PTI

Top Stories

India logs 70K Covid cases, lowest since March 31, 3,921 deaths

India logs 70K Covid cases, lowest since March 31, 3,921 deaths

This is the seventh consecutive day when the country has rep...

India natural ally of G7 in taking on global challenges: PM Modi

India natural ally of G7 in taking on global challenges: PM Modi

Calls on G7 to fulfil its promise of setting aside $100 bill...

AICC panel on Punjab meets Rahul post SAD-BSP pact

AICC panel on Punjab meets Rahul post SAD-BSP pact

Proposes widespread revamp of Punjab Pradesh Congress Commit...

Parkash Singh Badal unlikely to appear before SIT in Kotkapura case

Parkash Singh Badal unlikely to appear before SIT in Kotkapura case

SAD spokesperson Daljeet Singh Cheema said the former CM was...

Dejected, tourists in Himachal return home

Dejected, tourists in Himachal return home

New guidelines to come into force from today

Cities

View All