Karnataka govt files objections to Panchamasali reservation PIL

The government has stated that the PIL is premature, and since it has not made any decision on the interim report filed by the commission, it needs to be dismissed. The PIL by Raghavendra DG has alleged that the government is likely to include the Panchamasalis in the 2A category of reservation based on the interim report of the commission.

Karnataka government on Wednesday filed its objections before the high court on the public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the interim report of the Karnataka State Backward Classes Commission (KSBCC) regarding the inclusion of Panchamasalis among the Lingayats in the 2A category of Other Backward Classes (OBCs) reservations.

Karnataka government filed its objections before the high court on the PIL challenging the interim report of the Karnataka State Backward Classes Commission (KSBCC) regarding the inclusion of Panchamasalis among the Lingayats in the 2A category (AFP)

The government has stated that the PIL is premature, and since it has not made any decision on the interim report filed by the commission, it needs to be dismissed.

The PIL by Raghavendra DG has alleged that the government is likely to include the Panchamasalis in the 2A category of reservation based on the interim report of the commission.

Since such a request was rejected by the commission in 2000, the court was requested to stop the government from making the inclusion now.

In an earlier hearing, the high court had ordered status quo on the interim report. A copy of the report was submitted by the government to the court in a sealed envelope.

Additional government advocate, Prathima Honnapura, filed the objections based on information provided by the secretary, KSBCC, before the division bench headed by chief justice Prasanna B Varale.

The objections stated that “there is no public interest in the present writ petition and the very petition is required to be dismissed in limine, and the petitioner has not complied with the Public Interest Rules of High Court.” The government also claimed that as per Article 15(4) of the Constitution, the State can make such provision “as is necessary for the favour of socially and educationally backward class citizens.”

It was also stated that in the Mandal Commission Case, the Supreme Court has held that “the government of the day can by way of its executive action prescribe as to which category of citizens could be classified as a socially and educationally backward class of citizens.”

It was in this pursuit that a permanent Backward Classes Commission was contemplated through the Karnataka State Backward Classes Act 1995. The commission has made several suggestions over the years on which the government has acted.

The objections claimed that the commission submitted an interim report and the writ petition filed at this stage is ‘premature’.

“Without there being any decision taken by the government at this stage and the basis of reclassification is still at the stage of consideration, no writ petition of the present nature is maintainable and therefore, liable to be dismissed,” the objections stated.