The Supreme Court adjourned hearing on the challenge to the Constitutional Validity of Maharashtra’s Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Act 2018, which grants reservation to Maratha Community.
A five-judge bench headed by Justices Ashok Bhushan, L. Nageswara Rao, S Abdul Nazeer, Hemant Gupta & S Ravindra Bhat was hearing the matter through video conferencing.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi request for adjournment. He said Physical meetings are dangerous today. Finding it challenging to prepare the matter with our clients. Officials are in mumbai. Lawyers scattered in different areas. There is an interim order against state of Maharashtra. But we are requesting after conferring with govt and other lawyers
It may be appropriate for a case of this nature to be heard once physical Hearing commence.
He said, Vaccines have started. It may take 6/8 weeks for all of us, judges and lawyers who are above 60- to get vaccinated. Hearing may be posted for March.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal seconds Rohatgi and said no prejudice will cause as the stay order will continue.
The bench led by Justice Ashok Bhushan said we will take a call after two weeks on what’s to be done. Whether we continue with virtual hearing or physical Hearing will begin will be decided by 25th. We will fix date for directions after 2 weeks. Then we will finalise schedule for hearing, he said.
The Maratha reservation case now to be heard on 5 February to decide on Schedule of Hearing.
Previously, the Constitution Bench had refused to lift the stay order put up by the three-nudge bench on making the appointments and admissions under the Maratha Quota. The three-judge bench headed by the Justice L Nageswara Rao had referred the appeals to the Constitution Bench.
The State of Maharashtra passed the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Act, 2018 (SEBC Act) which provides for reservation for the Maratha community in the state of Maharashtra. The Act was challenged before the Bombay High Court which had upheld the Constitutional Validity. The decision of the Bombay High Court upholding the law with modifications was challenged before the Supreme Court. One of primary grounds for challenge was that this law, if implemented, would breach the 50% upper ceiling put in place for reservations.
On 27 June 2019, the Bombay High Court had upheld the constitutional validity of the Act. It reasoned that:
- State governments have the power to increase reservation beyond the ceiling limit of 50% in extraordinary circumstances justified by quantifiable data.
- The Justice Gaikwad Commission report was based on scientific and quantifiable data which adequately justified both including Marathas as a socially and educationally backward class as well as the extra-ordinary condition of creating reservations beyond the 50% ceiling limit.
- The State Government did not encroach upon judicial power as it did not directly overrule any court order. It merely removed the basis of the Court’s earlier order by repealing the 2014 Ordinance and Act.
- The Act meets the test of reasonable classification under Article 14 of the Constitution as it provides reservation for the newly identified class of Marathas, who have been historically incorrectly denied affirmative action, without unjustly depriving the existing Other Backward Classes.
- The 102nd Constitution (Amendment) Act, 2018 does not curtail the legislative competency of state legislatures to give effect to Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution through a fair and adequately effective Commission.