SC says Govt has no reliable data, OBC quota stayed
Source: http://www.ibnlive.com/news/sc-says-quota-is-vote-bank-politics-stays-order/37225-3.html
CNN-IBN
New Delhi: In what could be big a blow to the Government's pro-reservation stance, the Supreme Court on Thursday stayed the 27 per cent reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in elite educational institutions like IIMs and IITs.
The Court ruled that the 1931 census could not be a determinative factor for identifying the OBCs for the purpose of providing reservation.
The ruling could once again set the stage for another clash between legislature and judiciary, as this is being seen as a setback to the Government.
The Bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat and L S Panta ruled on the batch of petitions filed by various organisations and individuals challenging the decision as being ultra vires (unconstitutional).
Various organisations had challenged the Centre's decision to implement the quota, claiming that there was no relevant data on the number of OBCs in the country.
The Bench said, "We are of the view that the impugned notification and enforcing the reservation for OBCs in the educational institutions must be put on hold as the Government has failed to provide any authentic or reliable data to justify its policy of reservation.”
SC held that Section 6 of the Constitution was not applicable since no data on who constitutes OBCs in India has been collected in the last 76 years.
"The Centre has to determine who are the socially and economically backward people of India, before the Central Educational Institutions Act can be given effect," the Bench stated.
However, the Bench clarified that the benefit of reservation for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes could not be withheld. It said that the Centre could go ahead with the OBC identification process to determine the backward classes.
This means that if the Government can provide the court with authentic data on who constitute the OBCs in India, then reservation may be implemented in favour of people who genuinely need it.
"Reservation cannot be permanent and appear to perpetuate backwardness," the Bench observed.
While saying this, however, the Apex Court reprimanded the Centre, saying that the Centre should stay away from dividing the society on caste basis and should behave in a more responsible way.
It added the Government's decision to implement the quota system was full of flaws.
Lawyer for United Student’s Forum, M L Lahoty told CNN-IBN, “SC has stayed the order on the Act saying to the Centre, ‘Don’t divide the country only because of your vote bank’ and that 'the consequences of this quota would be very bad'."
The Centre had earlier justified the decision to implement reservation saying that Parliament had power to enact laws and that if the issue of giving OBCs reservation is not addressed, then there could be law and order problems in the country.
It had also maintained that general category students would not be affected by the quota, as the number of general seats has been increased proportionately.
Brushing this aside, the Bench said that the OBC quota was just vote bank politics and said it was forced to take the decision against the Government as the Government did not implement the SC's last two orders.
It said that a final decision would be taken only after proper documents related to OBCs were submitted.
The Government had enacted the Central Educational Institutions Act last year which provided for the reservations in institutes of higher education.
The hearing on the matter has been adjourned till the August 3, 2007.
posted by Youth for Equality, JNU at
2:26:00 PM
3 Comments:
The Best way to diversify all Reservation System in India, is to make it on Income criteria. Such as 50 % seats reserved for families below annual income of say Rs.20,000/-. All the problems to this question will be solved. But it is only the politicians who want to stick to that old system, only for the sake of their own playing with the game.
Dr. Ambedkar had suggested this reservation system for upcoming of SC/ST people for period of ten years, from 1951. But there was a sub clause that in case of need it can be extended for further ten years.
It was in 1961 Jawaharlal Nehru who extended it up to 1970, then Indira Gandhi from 1971 to 1980, then again from 1981 to 1990, then Rajiv Gandhi from 1991 to 2000, then Atal Bihari Vajpeyi from 2001 to 2010.
Any political party has no courage to do the right job. Once upon a time Bajpeyi had spoken as a opposition party leader in the year 1993 to make this system on Income Basis, but he was compelled to apologise in the Parliament just on the next day !! This is all Indian politics.
The wife of Dr Ambedkar had addressed a public meeting in Ahmedabad in 1992, mentioned that my late husband did not wish this system for so many years, as is now working in India. He had thought the extension clause for only for once or twice.
Otherwise you very well understand that poors can be from the caste of Brahmins, Jain, Patel, Muslims too. And those who are not Poor even from SC/ST castes, must be deprived from availability of benefits from this system. Its very simple. Please take this issue before public opinion again and again.
Repeat, Please take this issue before public opinion again and again. So once upon a time reservation system must be changed to Income Basis criteria.
Please do not worry how Government will decide Income base to all individuals. Presently all applicants to state housing board’s housing scheme and all applicants of petroleum product dealership, have to sign an affidavit of Not having annual family income over Rs.50,000/-. Our govtt has successfully issued separate ration cards to families “Below poverty Line” families. There are so many other ways too.
By
pataudee, at Thu Mar 29, 09:44:00 PM GMT+5:30
As a person who sympathise with the cause YFE is propounding, I must say that its YFE which is damaging its own initiatives. When activists of YFE who do not have any knowledge about judicial process start analysing judgments, it becomes scary, to say the least. My dear friend... the ten year thing you have mentioned is not with regard to reservations in employment or admission to educational institutions. It was reservation for SCs and STs in legislative bodies. Art. 16(4) never had such a provision.
Dear blogger if you hail the judgemnet of the SC you should also accept Indira Swahney judgement which is of a higher bench. This has clearly rejected income based reservations on the ground that reservation is not a poverty eradication scheme. It was Narasimha Rao who introduced 10% reservation on the basis of income, which was struck down in this case.
By
Anonymous, at Fri Mar 30, 02:29:00 PM GMT+5:30
http://reservationfacts.blogspot.com/
CASTEISM, A FORM OF RACISM. SO WHY TO PRACTICE IT ?
U.N. HAS PLACED CASTEISM IN INDIA AS A "FORM OF RACISM"......SO WHY SO MANY EVEN EDUCATED YOUTH STILL DO NOT WANT TO THROW IT FROM THEIR MENTALITY. RESERVATION ARISED BECAUSE OF CASTEISM AND CAN'T BE IGNORED TILL CASTEISM IS PREVAILENT. SO WHAT ABOUT PROTESTING AGAINST CASTE SYSTEM FIRST? WE SHOULD ALWAYS LOOK AT THE ROOT OF PROBLEM RATHER THAN SHOOTS.
YOUTH ANTI-RESERVATIONISTS SAY SOCIETY IS CHANGED NOW. HAS IT CHANGED OR WE ARE JUST SEEING CASTE SYSTEM TAKING MODERN FORMS. WE CAN NOW SEE ENGLISH MATRIMONIALS EVEN MATRIMONY WEBSITES BASED ON CASTES. THE PEOPLE USING INTERNET REPRESENT OUR MODERN YOUTH. NOW YOU CAN EVEN TAKE EXAMPLE OF SOCIAL NETWORKING SITES. YOU WOULD FIND HUNDREDS OF CASTE BASED COMMUNITIES LIKE "BRAHMANS", "PROUD KSHATRIYAS" ETC WITH MEMBERS IN THOUSANDS SOME LARGEST ONES HAVE SOME 50,000 MEMBERS.
By
Anonymous, at Sun Jun 29, 03:16:00 AM GMT+5:30
Post a Comment
<< Home