HC has set aside Bihar Reservation laws, that enhanced the reservations for SCs, STs and Backward Classes to 65% from existing 50%, as unconstitutional.
Reasons for striking down the amendments
- HC termed the amendments violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution.
- There is a ceiling limit of 50% for reservations, as prescribed by a 9-judge constitution bench in Indra Sawhney case (1992).
- Reservation was based on mere proportion of population of backward classes (proportionate reservation), which is not sanctioned by the constitution.
- State did not conduct any analysis or in-depth study before enhancing reservations.
Important Judgements regarding reservation
- Indra Sawhney Case (1992): Sets the limit for reservation as 50%.
- It also nullified the provision of reservation in promotions and the concept of ‘Creamy layer’ was introduced.
- M. Nagaraj Case (2006): Affirmative action should be only to such an extent as not to compromise efficiency in administration.
- Jarnail Singh Case (2018): Reservation in promotions does not require the state to collect quantifiable data on the backwardness of the SCs and the STs.
- Janhit Abhiyan case (2022): Upheld the validity of 103rd Constitutional amendment for providing EWS reservation (10%) was upheld.
Constitutional Provisions for Reservation
|
