SC remarks on quota worries Centre

NEW DELHI: The Constitution bench on Thursday reserved its judgment on the validity of OBC quotas in higher education. The Supreme Court’s decision presented itself as a cause of concern for the Centre. It is believed that ministers held informal meetings on oral observations of the apex court against the inclusion of creamy layer in the ambit of reservation. Keeping the creamy layer of OBCs out of the scope of reservations would dilute the government’s intent.

The verdict was reserved after hearing the pleas of both the pro and anti-quota groups over 25 days. Besides Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, the Constitution Bench comprises Justices Arijit Pasayat, C K Thakker, R V Raveendran and Dalveer Bhandari.

The bench began hearing the matter on August 7. The case was referred to the Constitution Bench by a two-judge bench, comprising Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice L S Panta, which had stayed the controversial quota law on March 29. The two-judge bench in its interim order stayed the implementation of the quota law questioning the validity of data based on 1931 census as determinative factor for the affirmative action.

The Bench had said that it will be disadvantegous to deserving OBCs if the creamy layer enjoyed reservations and that could lead to clash in society. The Centre, however, said that the concept of the exclusion of creamy layer as evolved in Mandal case was applicable for jobs and not for education.

The second issue on which government was snubbed by the apex court was on its decision to provide reservation primarily on the basis of 1931 census. The court had also grilled the government putting questions on how many castes were deleted from its lists meant for giving reservation.

“It is strange that when we do not have an outer limit we are adding more castes in the list”, the court had remarked.

The anti-quota petitioners had drawn attention that the number of castes in the list have risen from 1,373 in 1950 to 5,013 by July 2006. It had referred to various reports including that of first backward class commission headed by Kaka Kalekar which in 1955 identified 2,399 castes and the second commission led by B P Mandal which in 1980 identified 3,763 castes.

The government on the other hand had justified its decision to provide reservation to OBCs and said that there can not be any limit for the policy of reservation in admission or in public employment. It had also supported the caste based reservation policy.

“It is submitted that conceptually there can not be any time limit imposed for the policy of reservation in admission or in employment” centre had said in its written submissions.

The government had said that the policy of reservation flows from the mandate of equality and till the time the constitutional objective of ‘real equality’ is achieved, there is a constitutional mandate on the state to have special provisions in the nature of reservation for the upliftment of backward classes.

“No time limit can be fixed for measures for social engineering” had said the written submissions of Solicitor General GE Vahanavati on behalf of centre.