Supreme Court stays Calcutta HC order blocking new OBC list in West Bengal
A bench of Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria expressed surprise at the High Court's reasoning that only the legislature could approve the OBC list, and not the executive.
'How can the High Court stay like this?' Live Law quoted the Supreme Court as saying. 'Reservation is part of the executive functions. This is the settled law... Executive instructions are enough for providing reservations and legislation is not necessary.'
The matter pertains to a notification issued by the West Bengal government earlier in June that added 76 sub-castes to the OBC category, taking the total number of communities in the grouping to 140.
Out of these, 80 communities are from among Muslims, while 60 are non-Muslims, The Indian Express reported. Muslims comprise 57.1% of the population included in the OBC category.
The state government's previous list of OBCs had 113 sub-groups, of which 77 were Muslims and 36 non-Muslims. However, the High Court had in May 2024 struck down the list, and had reduced OBC reservations from 17% to 7%.
The new list would allow the state government to restore OBC reservations to 17%.
The High Court's May 2024 decision was expected to affect nearly five lakh certificates. The state government's challenge to the verdict was also pending before the Supreme Court.
On June 17, the High Court stayed the implementation of the new list and told the state government not to take steps based on it till July 31, when the case will be heard next.
At the hearing on Monday, Gavai also disagreed with the High Court's observation that the state should have placed the reports and bills before the legislature for amendments and introductions to the 2012 Act's schedule.
Advocate Ranjit Kumar, representing the respondents, told the bench that the list had to be approved by the legislature as per the law enacted by the state government.
Advocate Guru Krishnakumar, representing the other respondents, also claimed that the list had been prepared without any data, Live Law reported.
Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the West Bengal government, said the new list was based on a fresh survey and report by the State Backward Classes Commission.
Sibal also argued that even the High Court had not held that the commission failed to conduct the exercise.
Gavai then told the respondents that the bench could ask the High Court to form a different bench to hear the matter.
'If you are willing, we will direct the HC to hear the matter in stipulated timeline, till then status quo will maintain,' Live Law quoted the Supreme Court said. 'We will ask the chief justice to constitute another bench to hear.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
18 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
SC orders discontinuation of 'inhuman' hand-pulled rickshaws in Matheran
MUMBAI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Maharashtra government to put an end to the functioning of hand-pulled rickshaws in Matheran within six months and switch to e-rickshaws, while calling the practice 'inhuman' and 'against the basic concept of human dignity'. SC orders discontinuation of 'inhuman' hand-pulled rickshaws in Matheran Hearing a plea filed by the Handcart Pullers Association seeking the introduction of e-rickshaws in place of the manual hand-pulled rickshaws, a bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai, Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice N V Anjaria said, 'Permitting such a practice, which is against the basic concept of human dignity in a country like India, belittles the constitutional promises of social and economic justice.' While referring to a scheme in Gujarat where the government issued e-rickshaws to locals in Kevadia on rent, the apex court told the Maharashtra government to come up with similar schemes and also ordered the setting up of Matheran Monitoring Committee, under the chairmanship of the district collector, which will be responsible to identify the people to whom the e-rickshaw licenses shall be issued. The court added that the beneficiaries could also include tribal women to ensure them a steady livelihood. The bench also noted that the state government should not make an excuse of a lack of funds and said, 'We clarify that non-availability of funds cannot be an excuse for non-implementation of the aforesaid scheme. We earnestly hope that the state would tender necessary assistance in stopping such an inhumane practice.' The court also told the state authorities to lay concrete paver blocks in Matheran and allow the local body to lay only clay paver blocks in the market area of the hill town, while making it clear that no paver blocks should be laid on the internal roads or the trekking routes of the hill town, which is the only pedestrian hill station in Asia and has been identified as an Ecologically Sensitive Zone (ESZ) by the Ministry of Environment and Forest and Climate Change.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Delhi HC issues notice in petition challenging UPSC decision barring women from military academies through CDS exam
New Delhi A bench of chief justice DK Upadhyay and justice Tushar Rao Gedela directed the Centre and UPSC to file their response in a petition. (Representative photo) The Delhi High Court on Wednesday issued notice in a petition challenging the Union Public Services Commission's (UPSC) decision barring women from applying to military academies through the Combined Defence Services (CDS) examination. A bench of chief justice DK Upadhyay and justice Tushar Rao Gedela directed the Centre and UPSC to file their response in a petition filed by Kush Kalra, and fixed the next hearing for November 12. In his petition, Kalra asserted that UPSC's May 28 advertisement for the CDS-II Examination 2025, restricting women from applying to three of the four service branches—the Indian Military Academy (IMA), Dehradun; Indian Naval Academy (INA), Ezhimala; and Air Force Academy (AFA), Hyderabad—was arbitrary and violative of the fundamental right to equality and profession. The notification only permits women to apply to the Officers Training Academy, Chennai, in the Short Service Commission (SSC) course. Kalra, in his plea, contended through advocate Jyotika Kalra, sought to highlight the inconsistency between the exclusion and the government's own statement in the same notification, which claimed it 'strives to have a workforce which reflects gender balance and women candidates are encouraged to apply.' Such a contradiction, Kalra argued, exposes a systemic and discriminatory barrier that undermines the rights of aspiring women candidates and runs counter to constitutional principles and the Supreme Court's 2020 ruling on permanent commission. In February 2020, the Supreme Court, while allowing permanent commission to women officers in the Army, ruled that restricting the appointment of women to command positions was unconstitutional. To be sure, the Centre in September 2021, after the Supreme Court's nudge, informed the court about its decision to induct women into the National Defence Academy (NDA). However, the top court in January 2022 demanded an explanation from the Union government on restricting the intake of women cadets in the upcoming session of the NDA to 19– the same as last year. Citing the example of Col Sofyia Qureshi, one of the two women officers who briefed the media after India's execution of Operation Sindoor, Kalra in his petition asserted that denying entry to women through CDS would deprive the country of such officers. 'This exclusion of women candidates from the opportunity to get employed through CDS, becomes a hurdle in the career advancement opportunities for women officers in the armed forces. The categorical exclusion of women candidates from applying for the CDS examination and getting selected for IMA, AFA and INA solely on the grounds of sex, without any reasonable or justifiable explanations is a violation of the fundamental right to equality,' the petition read. Kalra said that even though the high court in April directed the Centre to take a call on the entry of women in CDS within eight weeks, no decision has been taken until now.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Give details on nixing nod to prosecute 4 netas: SC to TN
NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the Tamil Nadu govt to provide details of cases pertaining to four political personalities against whom sanction for prosecution in corruption cases granted by the competent authorities were withdrawn following a change of government in the state after elections. TN additional advocate general Amit Anand Tiwari termed the PIL filed by Chennai-based lawyer Karuppiah Gandhi in this connection as a "motivated petition", aimed at garnering political mileage, and asserted before a bench of Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan and N K Singh that the state has scrupulously adhered to the procedure established by law to deal with the cases. Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocate D S Naidu said the petition referred to 18 political personalities, who were or are ministers or MPs, against whom investigations were derailed, chargesheets were supplemented with assertions about their innocence to close the cases, or sanction for prosecution granted earlier were withdrawn. "Withdrawing sanction to prosecute is unheard of in criminal jurisprudence," he said. Referring to Tiwari's "politically motivated petition" argument, Justice Bhuyan told Naidu, "This is a malady not confined to Tamil Nadu alone. It is spread to the entire country. If you open a Pandora's box, it will come back to you one day". Tiwari said that investigations were carried out in the cases and taken to logical ends. The Madras high court was seized of some of the cases, he said. The bench told him, "Why don't you file a short affidavit giving details about the four cases where the previous sanction for prosecution was withdrawn allegedly after a change of political regime? We will confine the proceedings to these four cases, which appear to be serious". On the prayer of the petitioner to transfer trial in these cases against politicians to another state, the bench said it would create complications over appointment of public prosecutor (PP). Naidu said the state where the cases are transferred can be empowered to appoint the PP, to which the bench did not agree. Tamil Nadu, in its affidavit filed earlier, had said, "The criminal cases investigated by the Directorate of Vigilance and anti-corruption bureau are dealt with in accordance with law without extraneous pressure. In spite of the party in power, the investigation, trial and appeal proceedings are carried out as per the established law and procedure".
