Lawyer: We are not averse to need-based reservation

MUMBAI: “We are not against Maratha or any other community for that matter. We are opposed to the very idea of caste-based reservation,” said Sanjeet Rammilan Shukla, lawyer and activist who has played an important role in the successful challenge to Maharashtra government’s decision to provide 16% reservation for Maratha community in public employment and education. “We are not averse to needbased reservation for economically backward sections of the society, for the ground reality is that majority of those in actual need of social support are still out of the mainstream because even education is beyond their reach,” he clarified.

In 2014, advocate Shukla petitioned the Bombay high court (HC) when the state government came up with June 25, 2014 decision to provide reservation to the Maratha community. He fought the legal battle with other petitioners, resulting in the HC staying the decision on November 14, 2014.

He again approached the HC after the then Bjp-led government in Maharashtra came out with a new legislation to ride over the HC stay order and introduce the same decision to

extend the benefit of reservation to Maratha community. This time, HC held the law constitutionally valid, prompting petitioners like the Shukla to move the Supreme Court.

Shukla said that in the earlier round the state government had relied on the Narayan Rane committee report on social status of Maratha community in Maharashtra to provide the reservation. In the second round, it was the report of justice (retired) MG Gaikwad committee which provided the much-needed support to the second legislation.