Latest news with #RavindraV.Ghuge
The Hindu
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Newly constituted Special Bench to hear petitions against Maratha reservation afresh from July 18
The Special Bench of the Bombay High Court on Wednesday (June 11, 2025) said it would hear afresh the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2024, which grants 10% reservation to the Maratha community in education, and in government jobs in the State, from July 18. Explained | Why were Marathas granted reservation? The full Bench comprising Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge, Justice N. J. Jamadar, and Justice Sandeep Marne said it would continue hearings even on alternate Saturdays, which are usually court holidays, to hear the final arguments in the case. The Supreme Court on May 14 directed the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court to urgently constitute a new Full Bench to hear the petitions against the Maratha reservation. The court issued the direction while hearing a writ petition filed by National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) 2025 aspirants, who have challenged the implementation of the 10% Maratha quota citing academic urgency and disruption in the admission process. On May 15, a High Court notification by the Registrar Judicial said that the Special Bench comprising the three judges had been constituted to hear and decide the public interest litigations (PILs) and civil writ petitions on matters relating to the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Act, 2024. The previous Full Bench comprised the former Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, and Justices G. S. Kulkarni and Firdosh P. Pooniwalla. The petitions in the matter were not completely heard after the former Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court was transferred in January this year as the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court. The large Bench had heard the matter extensively. A clutch of petitions challenged the law on the ground that the Marathas were not a backward community needing the benefits of reservation, and that the State had already crossed the 50% cap on quotas. The petitioners had concluded their arguments in October 2024, whereas the State had started presenting its arguments in November 2024. The 2024 Act, enacted by the ruling Mahayuti government, grants 10% reservation in education, and government jobs to the Maratha community, who make up nearly one-third of the State's population. This law was at the forefront of political discourse during the 2024 Lok Sabha and Maharashtra Assembly elections. The Act was passed on February 20, 2024, and notified on February 26, 2024, by then Chief Minister Eknath Shinde, based on a report by retired Justice Sunil B. Shukre, who led the Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission. The report cited 'exceptional circumstances and extraordinary situations' to justify granting reservation to the Maratha community by breaching the 50% cap on reservations in the State.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Bombay high court sets July hearing to reconsider challenges to Maratha reservation law
MUMBAI: A special three-judge bench of the Bombay High Court on Wednesday set July 18 as the date it would start hearing afresh the challenges to the state's latest iteration of the Maratha reservations. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now After the Supreme Court directive, the HC in May constituted a new three-judge bench to hear petitions, including those filed as public interest litigation (PIL), challenging the constitutional validity of the 2024 law providing Maratha reservation. The state opposed the request for consideration of any interim relief. The HC is faced with a clutch of petitions that assailed the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Act, 2024 (SEBC), which gives 10 percent reservation to the Marathas in public employment. The new full bench of Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge, Justice N. J. Jamadar, and Justice Sandeep Marne recorded submissions of Advocate General Birendra Saraf. There were detailed arguments heard in 2024 on interim relief, after which there was an interim arrangement that all further admissions to educational institutions and employment would be subject to the orders of the court. He submitted that this has operated for over a year and that the request for fresh consideration of interim relief was unwarranted. Pradeep Sancheti, senior counsel for a petitioner challenging the constitutional validity of GR, sought an earlier date. Other lawyers also argued, saying students who took admission last year were also affected and hence were seeking interim orders. The top court last month asked the HC to expeditiously hear the pleas, including applications by students appearing for the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) undergraduate and postgraduate exams of 2025. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The students filed pleas seeking interim relief, claiming that a delay in the disposal of pleas was impacting their right to equal consideration in the admission process. The petitions in the matter were not fully heard when the former Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court was transferred in January this year as the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court. The High Court must consider the issue of interim relief without delay due to the wide-reaching impact of the case on students who are currently undergoing the admission process, the Supreme Court said. Last July, the High Court observed that the Maharashtra state backward class commission, headed by the former High Court Judge, Justice S. B. Shukre, was a necessary party to be heard in one of the PILs filed before it against the validity of the Maratha reservations.
