Maha Maratha quota fails to meet Mandal criteria

The states can, through their existing mechanisms, or even statutory commissions, can only make suggestions to the President or the Commission, for inclusion, exclusion or modification of castes or communities in the SEBC list, Justice Bhat said.

The states’ power to make reservations, in favour of particular communities or castes, the quantum of reservations, the nature of benefits and the kind of reservations, and all other matters falling within the ambit of Articles 15 and 16 except with respect to identification of SEBCs, remains undisturbed, the judgement, endorsed by two other judges, said.

While Justice Bhushan wrote the 412-page long verdict for himself and Justice Nazeer and was in minority on the point whether the 102nd Amendment takes away the right of states to identify SEBC.

All the five judges however held the 102nd amendment valid and it did not affect the federal polity and did not violate the basic structure of the Constitution.

Article 342A by denuding states power to legislate or classify in respect of ‘any backward class of citizens’ does not affect or damage the federal polity and does not violate the basic structure of the Constitution, Justice Bhat said.

All judges concurred on aspects such as the Indra Sawhney judgment, also known as the Mandal verdict, did not require to be referred to a larger bench.

They agree that the Maharashtra State Reservation (of seats for admission in educational institutions in the State and for appointments in the public services and posts under the State) for Socially and Educationally Backward

Classes (SEBC) Act granting 12 and 13 per cent reservation for Maratha community in addition to 50 per cent social reservation is not covered by exceptional circumstances as contemplated in Mandal judgement.

The state government, on the strength of the Maharashtra State Backward Commission Report chaired by M.C. Gaikwad has not made out a case of existence of extraordinary situation and exceptional circumstances in the state to fall within the exception carved out in Indra Sawhney judgement, Justice Bhat said.

All judgments said the appointments made in government jobs and admissions in post graduate courts after the Bombay High Court verdict of 2019 upholding Maratha quota and September 9, 2020 order of the top court staying the implementation of quota ill not be affected.