Cal HC to hear stay plea on new OBC list today
Kolkata: Calcutta High Court will decide on Tuesday whether to stay the state executive order that includes 140 subgroups, of which 80 are Muslims, in the new OBC list. The earlier list, struck down by the HC to a large extent, had 113 OBC subgroups with 77 Muslims and 36 others.
Bengal assembly passed the new notification last week after the HC, on May 22, 2024, struck down the categorisation of the prevalent OBC A and B categories made post-2011.
A host of petitions challenging the new state executive order were filed in the high court even when the matter was pending before the Supreme Court. The petitioners prayed for a stay on the executive order, calling it a "blatant violation" of a HC division bench order on May 22.
A division bench of justices Tapabrata Chakraborty and Rajasekhar Mantha on Monday adjourned the hearing of the matter till 2 pm on Tuesday to decide whether the prayer for a stay by petitioner Purabi Das could be granted.
Senior counsel Bansuri Swaraj, supporting the prayer for a stay, pleaded that the West Bengal Commission for Backward Classes had violated guidelines set by the division bench for determining inclusion of communities under the OBC category.
Citing the division bench order, Swaraj claimed it had directed a "fair, transparent and just" procedure for the process and asked for a survey of the whole population. "The commission held that it would be an absurd and unworkable proposition to conduct a survey of the whole population on each and every occasion the commission considers inclusion of communities under OBC category. The commission instead chose Ashleyan's formula to determine the sample size for the survey," she said.
Swaraj cited a nine-bench judgment of Supreme Court (Indra Sahwney vs Union of India) to argue that a survey means a survey of the whole population. Advocate general Kishore Datta submitted that the matter was pending before the Supreme Court. In the meantime, the state had to urgently make recruitments and admissions in colleges and universities under OBC category, he said.
Justice Chakraborty observed that the state could make recruitments from among the 66 OBC categories before 2010, which the HC didn't touch. Justice Mantha held that the state could undertake a special recruitment drive from among the new OBC list later.
"We want to examine the process and its sanctity. We also want to see whether these classes were appropriately represented in the state. Now, if the state jumps the horse before the cart, we are left nowhere," Justice Mantha observed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Unlike Opposition, social justice not mere rhetoric for NDA, says Anupriya
1 2 Lucknow: Union minister and Apna Dal (S) chief Anupriya Patel on Monday said that Centre's notification for the Census exercise cleared the path for a caste-based census. "Under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the NDA govt is ready to take yet another revolutionary step in the area of social justice," Patel posted on her X account. Patel said that, unlike the opposition, the NDA doesn't use the politics of social justice as mere rhetoric. "For us, true social justice means the economic and social empowerment of the deprived classes — this is both our policy and commitment," she said. The Apna Dal (S) president said that the NDA govt fulfilled the unrealised dream of Apna Dal (S) founder, late Dr Sonelal Patel. "He continuously fought for a caste census throughout his political journey. Inspired by his thoughts, all his followers carried this movement from the streets to Parliament. Today is a moment of immense satisfaction for all of us," she said. Patel said that the NDA govt worked on the ground to achieve the objective of social justice. This, she said, included granting constitutional status to the National OBC Commission, implementing the OBC quota in NEET-PG entrance exams, enforcing OBC reservation in admissions to Navodaya, Sainik, and central schools, resolving the 13-point roster dispute in universities, and ensuring that the benefits of welfare schemes reach the most deprived sections.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Consider setting up permanent consumer courts: SC to Centre
Nagpur: The Supreme Court recently directed the central govt to create a permanent adjudicatory framework comprising full-time staff and presiding officers for consumer disputes in India. The Centre was directed to submit an affidavit in three months on the feasibility of setting up a permanent consumer tribunal or court. It emphasised that consumer forums cannot be run on temporary tenure-based appointments. "We would only implore upon it to appreciate the pressing need for a permanent structure," the bench noted. The court, invoking powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, passed sweeping directions in a batch of appeals, while ruling on the legality and structure of consumer forums under the 2020 Rules. The SC directed that the new rules, to be notified within four months, must strictly follow earlier judgments in Rojer Mathew and Madras Bar Association cases and include a fixed five-year tenure. It also ruled that the selection committee must have a judiciary-majority composition. No written exam or viva voce will be needed for appointing or reappointing presidents and judicial members of state and district commissions, while such a process will be required only for non-judicial posts, in consultation with respective state service commissions. The SC upheld that only serving or retired district judges would be eligible for the post of district commission presidents. Once the new rules are in place, all states must complete recruitment under them within four months. Striking a Constitutional note, the bench stated, "Consumerism constitutes the very spirit of the Constitution," linking it with Articles 38, 39, and 47. It called consumer rights inalienable and remarked that consumer litigation is a form of public interest litigation, strengthening participatory democracy — a basic feature of the Constitution. The judgment also addressed three HC rulings from Bombay and Telangana concerning appointment procedures. It upheld the Bombay HC's decision to strike down parts of the 2020 Rules but modified certain aspects relating to reappointments and tenure clarifications. It also ruled that all serving appointees, whether selected before or after the Supreme Court's first ruling in the case in March 2023, may continue until the completion of fresh recruitment under the new rules. Tushar Mandlekar, assisted by Tejas Fadnavis, Astha Sharma and Anju Thomas, represented the original petitioner Mahendra Limaye, a Nagpur-based lawyer, while assistant solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati appeared for the central govt. Limaye had approached Nagpur bench of Bombay HC challenging an advertisement issued in May this year for recruitment of members or president in district and state consumer commissions in Maharashtra. The HC order stated, "Rule 6(1) of the Rules of 2020 is struck down on the ground that the same results in diluting the involvement of the judiciary in the process of appointment of the president and members of the state commission and the district commission. The said Rule is against the spirit of the decision of the Constitution Bench". The SC bench made it clear that existing appointees allowed to continue under this judgment will serve a four-year tenure, not the new five-year term. "We feel that the time has come to effect a change in mindset revamping the tenure of office in consumer fora," the judges observed.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Show-cause: Prof moves HC, PU panel reviewing matter
Chandigarh: A disciplinary matter involving a PU law department professor still remains under review by the varsity's standing committee, after a show-cause notice was issued in Jan and a subsequent legal challenge in Punjab and Haryana HC. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The HC had disposed of the writ petition in view of the fact that the matter was being reviewed by a PU standing committee. The proceedings began with a show-cause notice issued to Prof Supinder Kaur by the department chairperson on Jan 16. The notice stated that during a meeting in the committee room on Jan 15, Kaur "allegedly exhibited unprofessional behaviour and used threatening and disrespectful language against the chairperson, in the presence of the faculty members of the JAAC, non-teaching staff and student research scholars. " It further alleged that she "allegedly refused to carry out your duties as a member of the technical committee." The notice cited provisions of the PU calendar, categorising the conduct as serious misconduct. In a written reply dated Jan 28, Kaur questioned the applicability of the cited rules and the authority of the chairperson to issue such a notice. She referred to the PU Act and requested documents supporting the allegations. Kaur then filed a writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana HC. During a hearing on March 24, in CWP-8100-2025, the university's counsel informed the court that "as per his instructions, the matter has been referred to Standing Committee to resolve the dispute." The court took note of this submission and did not issue further directions.
