Supreme Court Adjourns Petition Against Reservations For Economically Weaker Sections Of Upper Castes Until July 16

Update: 2019-07-01 12:27 GMT

[ By Bobby Anthony ]The Supreme Court has adjourned a plea challenging implementation of a constitutional amendment which grants 10% reservations in jobs and education to economically weaker sections among upper castes, until July 16.A decision on whether such a quota should be implemented or stayed would be decided after the court hears arguments on the petition on July 16.It was in January...

[ By Bobby Anthony ]

The Supreme Court has adjourned a plea challenging implementation of a constitutional amendment which grants 10% reservations in jobs and education to economically weaker sections among upper castes, until July 16.

A decision on whether such a quota should be implemented or stayed would be decided after the court hears arguments on the petition on July 16.

It was in January that The Constitution (One Hundred and Twenty-Fourth Amendment) Bill, 2019 was passed in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha.

Provisions of the bill provide reservations in aided as well as unaided institutions to economically weak upper caste individuals whose family incomes are below Rs 8 lakh per annum.

It may be recalled that the Bharatiya Janata Party-led central government had clarified that such a law would not affect existing reservations for other groups.

In March 2019, the Bharatiya Janata Party-led central government which was in the process of seeking re-election had claimed that it wanted to provide equal opportunities in higher education and employment to those who have been “excluded by virtue of their economic status”.

The decision to introduce a law to grant 10% quota for economically disadvantaged upper castes was defended by the Bharatiya Janata Party-led central government, claiming that the intent behind such an amendment was to bring about what it called “social equality”.

The Bharatiya Janata Party-led central government had claimed that it wanted to provide equal opportunities in higher education and employment to those who have been “excluded by virtue of their economic status”.

The central government had also claimed that the law did not come under the ambit of the Indra Sawhney versus Union of India 1992 verdict, which is also known as the Mandal case verdict.

The 1992 verdict had placed certain restrictions on the centre to ensure that a certain quota of college seats and jobs were reserved and also held that reservations could not be based on economic criterion alone.

The centre had stated said that there was no breach of the 50% ceiling limit under the constitutional amendment to provide 10% reservation to economically weaker sections in the general category.

In January 2019, the Supreme Court had issued a notice to the centre after a plea was filed against the amendment. The court had stated that it would examine the matter but it had refused to stay the implementation of the law.

Similar News