Promotion quota: Verdict reserved
The bench was hearing batch of petitions
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on petitions seeking a seven- bench examination of its judgment in the M. Nagaraj case which had put conditions for granting quota benefits for job promotions to SC/ ST employees working in the public sector.
Attorney- general K. K. Venugopal told the court that the community ( SC/ ST) as a whole has been facing discrimination
The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved verdict on a batch of petitions relating to the issue whether quota should be provided for Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes in government jobs, even as the Centre asserted that the stigma of caste printed on the forehead of a SC/ ST never disappears.
A Constitution Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Kurian Joseph, Rohinton Nariman, S. K. Kaul and Indu Malhotra reserved with the Attorney General ( AG) K. K. Venugopal maintaining that there was no need for testing backwardness of SC/ ST employees while granting promotion. He said the discrimination still exists though the position of SC/ ST has improved to some extent in the last 70 years.
The Bench was hearing batch of petitions seeking reconsideration of the ‘ 2006 Nagaraj judgment’ against such quota. In October 2006, a five judge Constitution Bench in the case of Nagaraj vs Union of India had concluded the issue by holding that the state is not bound to make reservation for SC/ ST in matter of promotions.
However, if they wish to exercise their discretion and make such provision, the state has to collect quantifiable data showing backwardness of the class and inadequacy of representation of that class in public employment.
There must be compelling reasons, namely, backwardness and inadequacy of representation, which enables the states to provide for reservation keeping in mind the overall efficiency of the state administration.
Disagreeing with this finding, the AG said there has to be a presumption of backwardness for SC/ ST and that the 2006 judgment should not have stipulated for satisfaction regarding backwardness of the class in providing reservation in promotion. He said there was no question of identification of creamy layer among SC/ STs.
AG submitted that there was no need for further quantifiable data for showing backwardness so as to provide reservations for promotions. He told the court that the community as a whole has been facing discrimination from the upper caste.