Latest news with #SEBC)Act
Indian Express
17-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Maratha quota hearings to resume: Why has the process restarted, what's happened so far?
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.
United News of India
16-05-2025
- Politics
- United News of India
HC forms special bench to hear challenges to Maratha quota law
Mumbai, May 16 (UNI) In accordance with a Supreme Court directive, the Bombay High Court on Friday constituted a special three-judge bench to hear petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2024, which grants a 10 per cent reservation to the Maratha community in education and public employment. The newly formed full bench comprises Justices Ravindra Ghuge, NJ Jamadar, and Sandeep Marne, as per a notification issued on May 15. This bench will preside over all public interest litigations and civil writ petitions contesting the validity and implementation of the SEBC Act, 2024. The schedule for the hearings is yet to be announced. The move follows a Supreme Court order on May 14, which instructed the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court to urgently form a bench and expedite hearings on the matter, in light of the academic urgency cited by students appearing for the 2025 NEET undergraduate and postgraduate examinations. The apex court emphasized the need to consider interim relief for students potentially affected by the ongoing legal uncertainty surrounding the Maratha quota. The SEBC Act, enacted on February 20, 2024, by the Eknath Shinde-led Maharashtra government, is based on the findings of the Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission chaired by retired Justice Sunil Shukre. The commission concluded that "exceptional circumstances and extraordinary situations" justified granting reservation to the Maratha community beyond the 50 per cent ceiling previously established by the Supreme Court. Petitioners have argued that the Maratha community does not meet the criteria for classification as a backward class and that the new law breaches the Supreme Court's cap on reservations. The legal debate is rooted in earlier challenges: a 2018 SEBC Act granting 16 per cent reservation to Marathas was upheld by the Bombay High Court but with reduced quotas, before being struck down entirely by the Supreme Court in May 2021. A subsequent review petition was dismissed in May 2023. The issue has been politically charged, dominating public discourse during the 2024 Lok Sabha and Assembly elections. The previous full bench, led by then Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya, had heard the matter extensively, with petitioners' arguments concluding in October 2024. However, hearings stalled after Chief Justice Upadhyaya's transfer to the Delhi High Court in January 2025, leaving the case in limbo until the formation of the new bench. The High Court had earlier passed interim orders stating that admissions and appointments under the Maratha quota would be subject to the outcome of the litigation. The new bench is expected to address both the merits of the law and the issue of interim relief for affected students in the coming sessions. UNI AAA PRS
Indian Express
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Maratha quota: SC tells HC Chief Justice to form new bench to hear pleas swiftly
The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court to constitute a new bench to hear pleas challenging the constitutional validity of the law providing Maratha reservation in an expeditious manner. The pleas were not heard after the then Bombay HC Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya's transfer as the CJ of Delhi HC in January this year. Justice Upadhyaya was a part of a full or three-judge bench, which since April, last year, had been hearing the pleas against the Socially and Educationally Backward Class (SEBC) Act, 2024 that provided 10 per cent reservation in education and government jobs to Maratha community. The petitioners' arguments had concluded on October 14, 2024. The 2024 law, which provided 10 per cent reservation in education and government jobs to the Maratha community that constitutes nearly one-third of Maharashtra's population, had been at the forefront of political discourse last year during the Lok Sabha and Assembly elections. On May 13, an SC bench of Justices B R Gavai (who assumed office of Chief Justice of India on May 14) and Augustine George Masih was hearing a plea by students appearing for National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) undergraduate and postgraduate exams of 2025. The students claimed that the delay in disposal of the matter was impacting their right to fair and equal consideration in the admission process and sought a stay on implementation of the 2024 Act. The bench noted that similar challenges to the law were pending before the HC and directed Chief Justice Alok Aradhe of Bombay HC to constitute a new bench to hear the pleas. The SC also directed the HC to consider the issue of interim relief as raised by the petitioner students at the earliest. The Act passed on February 20, 2024 was formulated by the then chief minister Eknath Shinde-led government based on a report of the Justice Sunil B Shukre (retd)-led Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission (MSBCC) that found 'exceptional circumstances and extraordinary situations exist' to grant reservation to Maratha community in excess of 50 per cent total reservation in the state. The petitions also challenged Justice Shukre's appointment and the action of the state government to implement the panel's report. On March 8, 2024, a division (two judge) bench of Justices Girish S Kulkarni and Firdosh P Pooniwalla passed an interim order 'in the interest of justice', stating that the applications for NEET 2024 for admission to undergraduate medical courses, wherein a 10 per cent reservation granted to members of the Maratha community is applicable, will be subject to further orders in the pleas challenging the law. Thereafter, a three-judge bench led by then CJ Upadhyaya along with Justices Kulkarni and Pooniwalla was constituted to hear the batch of pleas. On April 16, 2024, the full bench clarified that till further orders, any applications for admissions to educational institutions or jobs at government authorities taking benefit of the impugned Act will be subject to further orders in the present proceedings.
