Context:
Recently, the Patna High Court invalidated the Bihar government’s decision to raise the reservation quota from 50% to 65% for Backward Classes (BC), Extremely Backward Classes (EBC), Scheduled Castes (SC), and Scheduled Tribes (ST) in educational institutions and government jobs.
Relevance:
GS II: Polity and Governance
Dimensions of the Article:
- High Court’s Ruling on Bihar Reservation Quota
- Need for Extended Reservation in Bihar
- Constitutional Provisions on Reservation
- Reservation not a fundamental Right
- Reservation Related Developments in India
- Way Forward
High Court’s Ruling on Bihar Reservation Quota
Context:
- November 2023 Notification: Bihar government increased the reservation quota for deprived castes from 50% to 65%.
- Reason: Based on a caste-based survey highlighting the need for better representation of BC, EBC, SC, and ST communities.
- Legislation: Bihar Assembly passed the Bihar Reservation Amendment Bill to implement the 65% quota.
Legal Challenge:
- PIL Filed: Challenging the increase beyond the 50% cap.
- Patna High Court Ruling:
- Violation: The 65% quota breached the 50% limit set by the Supreme Court in the Indira Sawhney case (1992).
- Reasoning: The decision was based on population proportion rather than “adequate representation” in jobs.
- EWS Quota: Adding the 10% Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) quota pushed the total reservation to 75%, deemed unconstitutional.
Need for Extended Reservation in Bihar:
Economic Indicators:
- Per Capita Income: Lowest in the country, below USD 800 per year (30% of national average).
- Fertility Rate: Highest in India, with only 12% urban population (national average is 35%).
- College Density: Lowest in India; 30% of population below the poverty line.
Demographic Representation:
- SC, STs, and Backward Classes: Constitute 84.46% of the population but underrepresented in jobs and education.
Proposed Measures for Improvement:
Education:
- RTE Forum Recommendations:
- Enhance early childhood development (ICDS centers).
- Improve teacher training.
- Shift to interactive and technology-integrated learning methods.
Skill Development and Employment:
- Skill-Building Programs: Aligned with industry needs.
- Entrepreneurship Programs: Through SIPB (Single-window Investment Promotion Board) to attract businesses and create jobs.
Infrastructure:
- Irrigation Systems: Improve to handle floods and droughts.
- Transport Network: Develop robust connections between rural and urban areas.
Social Inclusion:
- Women’s Empowerment:
- Focus on education, skill development, and financial inclusion.
- Increase workforce participation and achieve social equality.
- Law Enforcement:
- Stricter enforcement to combat social stratification.
- Promote social harmony.
Constitutional Provisions on Reservation
- Article 16(4) empowers the state to make any provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens which, in the opinion of the state, is not adequately represented in the services under the state.
- By way of the 77th Amendment Act, a new clause (4A) was added to Article 16, empowering the state to make provisions for reservation in matters of promotion to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe employees if the state feels they are not adequately represented in services.
Reservation not a fundamental Right
- It is a settled law, time and again reiterated by the Supreme Court, that there is no fundamental right to reservation or promotion under Article 16(4) or Article 16(4 A) of the Constitution.
- Rather they are enabling provisions for providing reservation, if the circumstances so warrant (Mukesh Kumar and Another vs State of Uttarakhand & Ors. 2020).
- However, these pronouncements no way understate the constitutional directive under Article 46.
- Article 46 mandates that the state shall promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people and in particular SCs and STs.
- However such provisions resulted in the ever-evolving jurisprudence of affirmative action in public employment.
Reservation Related Developments in India
Mandal storm
- Reservation in employment which was otherwise confined to SC and STs got extended to new section called the Other Backward Classes (OBCs).
- This was the basis of the recommendations of the Second Backward Class Commission as constituted, headed by B.P. Mandal.
- The Mandal Commission (1980) provided for 27% reservation to OBC in central services and public sector undertakings.
- This was over and above the existing 22.5% reservation for SCs and STs, was sought to be implemented by the V.P. Singh Government in 1990.
- The same was assailed in the Supreme Court resulting in the historic Indra Sawhney Judgment.
Indra Sawhney case, 1992
- In its landmark 1992 decision in Indra Sawhney vs Union of India, the Supreme Court had held that reservations under Article 16(4) could only be provided at the time of entry into government service but not in matters of promotion.
- It added that the principle would operate only prospectively and not affect promotions already made and that reservation already provided in promotions shall continue in operation for a period of five years from the date of the judgment.
- On June 17, 1995, Parliament, acting in its constituent capacity, adopted the seventy-seventh amendment by which clause (4A) was inserted into Article 16 to enable reservation to be made in promotion for SCs and STs.
The Constitution (Seventy-seventh Amendment) Act, 1995
- In Indra Sawhney Case, the Supreme Court had held that Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India does not authorise reservation in the matter of promotions.
- However, the judgment was not to affect the promotions already made and hence only prospective in operation, it was ruled.
- By the Constitution (Seventy-seventh Amendment) Act, 1995, which, Article 16(4-A), was inserted.
- It aimed to provide the State for making any provision for reservation in matters of promotion to any class or classes of posts in the services under the State.
- This was to be in favour of the SCs and the STs which, in the opinion of the State, are not adequately represented in the services under the State.
- Later, two more amendments were brought, one to ensure consequential seniority and another to secure carry forward of unfilled vacancies of a year.
M. Nagaraj case, 2006
- The constitutional validity of Art 16(4A) was upheld by the Supreme Court in the M. Nagaraj v. Union of India 2006 case; however, State is not bound to make such reservations in promotions.
- If the states seek to make reservation in promotions, then it must collect quantifiable data on three parameters
- The backwardness of the class
- The inadequacy of the representation of that class in public employment;
- The general efficiency of service would not be affected
Jarnail Singh vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta case, 2018
- In Jarnail Singh vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta case of 2018, the Supreme Court held that reservation in promotions does not require the state to collect quantifiable data on the backwardness of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes.
- The court upheld the argument that once various caste groups were listed as SC/ST, this automatically implied they were backward.
- That judgment had, while modifying the part of the Nagaraj verdict which required States to show quantifiable data to prove the ‘backwardness’ of a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe community to provide quota in promotion in public employment, rejected the Centre’s argument that Nagaraj misread the creamy layer concept by applying it to SC/ST.
The Constitution (103rd Amendment) Act, 2019
- The 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) other SCs, STs and backward classes for government jobs and admission in educational institutions.
- This is currently under challenge before the Supreme Court which has referred the same to a constitution bench.
- This was a critical milestone to specifically include economic backwardness without social backwardness as is traditionally seen.
Dr. Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil vs Chief Minister (2021)
- Despite the Indra Sawhney ruling, there have been attempts on the part of many States to breach the rule by way of expanding the reservation coverage.
- The Maharashtra Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Act 2018, (Maratha reservation law) came under challenge before the Supreme Court.
- This case was referred to a bench of five judges to question whether the 1992 judgment needs a relook.
- Interestingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the Indra Sawhney decision, and struck down Section 4(1)(a) and Section 4(1)(b) of the Act which provided 12% reservation for Marathas in educational institutions and 13% reservation in public employment respectively.
- This judgment gave out a strong message that some State governments blatantly disregard the stipulated ceiling on electoral gains rather than any exceptional circumstances.
Way Forward
- Assessing Current Representation: It is essential to evaluate the present representation of SC/ST/OBCs at various levels and departments. This data will help set specific targets for fulfilling reservation quotas.
- Merit and Relaxation System: Advocate for a system that emphasizes merit while providing some relaxation in qualifying marks for SC/ST/OBC candidates in promotions. This ensures that qualified candidates from these communities have a better chance while maintaining acceptable competency standards.
- Addressing Concerns: Acknowledge the issues related to unqualified candidates being promoted due to reservations.
- Training and Mentorship: Propose robust training and mentorship programs for promoted SC/ST/OBC employees to bridge any skill gaps and ensure they excel in their new roles.
- Temporary Measure: Highlight that reservations are a temporary measure aimed at achieving long-term social justice and equal opportunity in promotions.
- Parallel Initiatives: Advocate for simultaneous initiatives that enhance education and access to resources for these communities, ultimately leading to a scenario where reservations might not be required.
-Source: The Hindu
