logo
Maratha quota hearings to resume: Why has the process restarted, what's happened so far?

Maratha quota hearings to resume: Why has the process restarted, what's happened so far?

Indian Express17-05-2025

The Bombay High Court this week constituted a new three-judge Bench to resume hearings on the challenge to the reservation in jobs and education granted to the Maratha community last year.
In February 2024, weeks ahead of Lok Sabha elections, the government of then Chief Minister Eknath Shinde enacted the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2024, which created a 10% quota in education and public employment for Marathas under the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) category.
The Maratha quota was a major issue in the Lok Sabha election and the Assembly elections held later that year. It is now expected to have an influence over the upcoming local body elections in the state.
The law was challenged in the High Court on the grounds that Marathas were not a backward community in need of reservation, and that the quota breached the 50% ceiling on quotas imposed by the Supreme Court in the Mandal case.
The last hearing in the matter took place almost seven months ago.
Why was the hearing paused?
A three-judge or 'Full Bench' of the High Court comprising then Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justices Girish S Kulkarni and Firdosh P Pooniwalla had begun hearing the challenge in April 2024.
The petitioners concluded their arguments on October 14, and Advocate General for Maharashtra Birendra Saraf opened arguments for the state on November 11.
However, before the proceedings could be concluded, Chief Justice Upadhyaya was transferred as Chief Justice of Delhi High Court. He took oath on January 21 this year; Justice Alok Aradhe took charge as Chief Justice of Bombay High Court that same afternoon.
So what has happened now?
On May 13, a day before he took charge as Chief Justice of India, Justices B R Gavai heard, along with Justice Augustine George Masih, a petition filed by students appearing for the 2025 National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) for admission to medical colleges.
The petitioners sought an interim stay on the implementation of the 2024 Act, arguing that the delay in resolving the legal challenge affected their right to equal opportunity in admissions.
The previous Full Bench led by then Chief Justice Upadhyaya had clarified on April 16, 2024 that any applications for admissions to educational institutions or government jobs taking benefit of the impugned Act would be subject to further orders in the ongoing proceedings.
The Supreme Court acknowledged the delay and directed Chief Justice Aradhe of the Bombay High Court to set up a new Bench to expedite hearings. The top court also asked the High Court to urgently consider the interim relief sought by the petitioners.
Complying with the SC's directive, the HC on Thursday (May 15) notified a new Full Bench comprising Justices Ravindra V Ghuge, N J Jamadar, and Sandeep V Marne to hear the public interest pleas and writ petitions challenging the Maratha quota Act.
How has the issue of Maratha reservations played out earlier?
The Marathas, who constitute almost a third of Maharashtra's population, are historically recognised as a 'warrior' community, most of whose members belong to agricultural and landowning backgrounds.
Their push for reservation in education and public employment dates back to the early 1980s and has remained a politically sensitive question, particularly during state Assembly and parliamentary elections.
Previous legislative efforts to create a Maratha quota have faced legal setbacks. In 2014, the Bombay HC had stayed a previous law granting reservation to the community, and the SC had subsequently declined to vacate the stay.
In 2017, the Maharashtra government formed the Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission (MSBCC) headed by Justice M G Gaikwad (retired), and based on its findings, The SEBC Act, 2018 was enacted.
In June 2019, the Bombay HC upheld the validity of the SEBC Act but concluded that the 16% reservation originally proposed was not justified. The court scaled it down to 12% for education and 13% for government jobs.
However, in May 2021, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court struck down the 2018 law. The SC ruled that the state had failed to demonstrate 'extraordinary circumstances' required to breach the 50% reservation ceiling limit laid down in the 1992 Indra Sawhney (Mandal) verdict of the Supreme Court.
So, on what basis did the government bring the SEBC Act, 2024?
On February 20, 2024, the Maharashtra legislature unanimously passed the SEBC Bill, drawing from the findings of an MSBCC led by retired Justice Sunil Shukre. The Shukre Commission had concluded that the Maratha community qualified as being socially and educationally backward.
It noted that there were 'exceptional circumstances and extraordinary situations exist' to grant reservation to the 'entirely marginalised' Maratha community in excess of the 50% total reservation in the state.
The Commission found an 'alarming' increase, from 0.32% to 13.7%, in the six years since 2018, in the rate of girl child marriages among Marathas. It also observed a substantial decline in the representation of Marathas in government services.
The earlier Gaikwad Commission had surveyed 43,629 families from villages in 355 talukas where Marathas formed the majority. The Shukre Commission's survey was much wider, covering more than 1.58 crore families across Maharashtra.
What has been argued before the High Court so far?
The petitioners have argued that the 50% reservation cap could be breached only after Parliament amends the Constitution.
They have argued that the 2024 Act has nothing new over the 2018 law — which has been struck down – other than the state's claim that the Shukre Commission's survey was wider.
AG Saraf has justified the law, arguing that it has been formulated after rectifying the earlier reservation, and is based on guidelines laid down by the SC.
He has argued that it is open to the state government to revisit the quota issue and to enact a law based on a detailed, large-scale survey.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Murshidabad violence: Charge sheet filed by Bengal police against 13 in father-son murder case
Murshidabad violence: Charge sheet filed by Bengal police against 13 in father-son murder case

New Indian Express

time12 minutes ago

  • New Indian Express

Murshidabad violence: Charge sheet filed by Bengal police against 13 in father-son murder case

KOLKATA: The West Bengal Police have submitted a charge sheet against 13 people in the father-son double murder case in Murshidabad's Zafarabad violence in April, a senior officer said. The murders of Haragobindo Das (74) and his son Chandan Das (40) took place on April 11 during the Dhuliyan-Suti-Shamshergunj communal violence, amid protests over the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 in the district. The riots left at least three people dead and many injured, besides forcing hundreds to flee their homes. The unrest, which lasted from April 8 to 12, had also caused widespread damage to public and private properties, prompting the Calcutta High Court to order the deployment of Central Armed Forces to restore law and order. "We have submitted the charge sheet before the district court within 55 days of the crime and have named 13 people in it," the official said on Friday. In the aftermath of the violence, the police had arrested over 300 suspected miscreants in connection with over 60 FIRs which were lodged at various police stations in Murshidabad. According to police reports at the Betbona village where the Das family residence was targeted, the attackers broke down the main door, dragged out Chandan Das and Hargobindo Das, and struck them with an axe in the back. A man reportedly stood guard until they died. Reports also noted that in some attacks, the rioters cut off the water supply to prevent fires from being extinguished. Although the details of those named in the charge sheet or the sections slapped on them were not immediately clear, a fact-finding team set up by the high court had named local Trinamool Congress leader Mehboob Alam, former chairman of the Dhuliyan Municipality, to have “directed” the attack. The team, while submitting its report before the high court on May 21, had also stated "inactivity and absence" of the state police, and added that the men in uniform did not respond to calls from the locals during the violence. The committee documented that "as many as 113 houses were badly affected in the village of Betbona", many of which were set on fire.

Haryana human rights panel seeks report on polluting factory
Haryana human rights panel seeks report on polluting factory

Hindustan Times

time21 minutes ago

  • Hindustan Times

Haryana human rights panel seeks report on polluting factory

Haryana Human Rights commission(HHRC) has sought report from Rewari deputy commissioner, municipal commissioner, municipal council and regional officer of the Haryana state pollution board, Rewari, on a complaint filed by residents of Bheem Basti seeking intervention against the continued operation of a private industrial unit, which is functioning illegally within a densely populated residential area. The right panel has sought a report before August 19. The complainants alleged that the factory named Sai Ram pipe Udyog, is operating in violation of environmental laws, emitting hazardous noise and air pollution, causing severe vibrations from heavy machinery and operating during night hours, thereby endangering the health and safety of residents and violating their fundamental and human rights. Right panel chairperson Lalit Batra observed that the conduct of the factory and the inaction of statutory bodies such as the Haryana State Pollution Control Board amount to a blatant violation of multiple provisions of environmental and municipal laws, including but not limited to Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981; Environment (Protection) Act, 1986; Factories Act, 1948, and Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000. 'These Noise Rules set maximum noise limits of 55 dB during the day and 45 dB at night for residential zones. The district authorities displayed apathy towards the residents' repeated pleas,' Batra said in the order.

Murshidabad violence: Charge sheet filed by Bengal police against 13 in father-son murder case
Murshidabad violence: Charge sheet filed by Bengal police against 13 in father-son murder case

The Hindu

time29 minutes ago

  • The Hindu

Murshidabad violence: Charge sheet filed by Bengal police against 13 in father-son murder case

The West Bengal Police have submitted a charge sheet against 13 people in the father-son double murder case in Murshidabad's Zafarabad violence in April, a senior officer said. The murders of Haragobindo Das (74) and his son Chandan Das (40) took place on April 11 during the Dhuliyan-Suti-Shamshergunj communal violence, amid protests over the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 in the district. The riots left at least three people dead and many injured, besides forcing hundreds to flee their homes. The unrest, which lasted from April 8 to 12, had also caused widespread damage to public and private properties, prompting the Calcutta High Court to order the deployment of Central Armed Forces to restore law and order. 'We have submitted the charge sheet before the district court within 55 days of the crime and have named 13 people in it,' the official said on Friday. In the aftermath of the violence, the police had arrested over 300 suspected miscreants in connection with over 60 FIRs which were lodged at various police stations in Murshidabad. According to police reports at the Betbona village where the Das family residence was targeted, the attackers broke down the main door, dragged out Chandan Das and Hargobindo Das, and struck them with an axe in the back. A man reportedly stood guard until they died. Reports also noted that in some attacks, the rioters cut off the water supply to prevent fires from being extinguished. Although the details of those named in the charge sheet or the sections slapped on them were not immediately clear, a fact-finding team set up by the high court had named local Trinamool Congress leader Mehboob Alam, former chairman of the Dhuliyan Municipality, to have 'directed' the attack. The team, while submitting its report before the high court on May 21, had also stated 'inactivity and absence' of the state police, and added that the men in uniform did not respond to calls from the locals during the violence. The committee documented that "as many as 113 houses were badly affected in the village of Betbona", many of which were set on fire.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store