SC seeks Centre's reply in plea for 10% reservation in Central Teacher Eligibility Test 2019

Update: 2019-05-21 07:37 GMT

Can the Supreme Court dismiss a petition and then assign a date for next hearing in the petition as an afterthought? Well, it can if one goes by the incident where the SC bench dismissed a petition filed on the issue of an advertisement placed but later relented and issued the date of next hearing in the coming months seeking the Centre’s and the educational institution’s response.The...

Can the Supreme Court dismiss a petition and then assign a date for next hearing in the petition as an afterthought? Well, it can if one goes by the incident where the SC bench dismissed a petition filed on the issue of an advertisement placed but later relented and issued the date of next hearing in the coming months seeking the Centre’s and the educational institution’s response.

The Supreme Court had dismissed the petition for 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) when it came up for hearing on 13 May, 2019 observing the issue of reservation can only arise at the time of recruitment and not at the time of writing a qualifying test. Later, however, the SC listed the issue for hearing on 1 July, 2019 asking the Centre and Central Board for Secondary Education (CBSE) to respond before the date of the next hearing.

A Supreme Court vacation bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and Sanjiv Khanna observed the benefit of 10% reservation did not apply to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe either.

The petition seeking 10% reservation for EWS was filed by Advocate Pushkar Sharma and Prashant Shukla. The petitioners drew the attention of the Apex Court that the advertisement published by CBSE on 23 January, 2019 for conducting CTET-2019 violated the rights guaranteed under the Constitution to EWS. The SC vacation bench noted the notification did not address the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe either.

The dismissal of the petition by the SC bench had left a void although the bench was right in their observation that any reservation applied to vacations arising in an organization and not to its qualifying tests. The void was felt especially in the Indian context where reservations exist in almost all governmental posts and corporations.

The point the petitioners made is valid if a case was made that the applicants to the CTET were all from affluent background. It defeats the purpose of reservation even if it existed at a later stage for the purpose of recruitment. In a progressive society it is necessary to diligently apply the scope for reservation at every stage in order to ensure benefit for everyone in society including the weaker section.

Similar News