Patna High Court ends 65% quota hike for jobs, colleges in Bihar

Bihar had last year raised the quota for SCs, STs, EBCs, and other backward classes (OBCs) in educational institutions and government jobs from 50% to 65%.

The Patna high court on Thursday struck down Bihar’s decision last year to raise caste-based quotas to 65%, underlining that merit could not be completely sacrificed at the altar of reparations in a verdict that delivered a blow to the state government and will have sweeping political and social ramifications.

Patna high court

Bihar had last year raised the quota for scheduled castes (SCs), scheduled tribes (STs), extremely backward classes (EBCs), and other backward classes (OBCs) in educational institutions and government jobs from 50% to 65% after a caste survey showed that these groups formed roughly 84% of the state’s population.

BJP, RJD clash over quota ruling by Patna HC, both vow to move Supreme Court

But the court noted that not only were backward communities adequately represented in public employment, the government had also attempted no in-depth study or analysis before enhancing reservation beyond the limit set by the Supreme Court in the landmark 1992 Indira Sawhney judgment.

The high court said the enhancement of reservations beyond the 50% limit – as set by a nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court in 1992 – was “bad in law” as well as opposed to the principles of equality emanating from the Constitution because the state failed to demonstrate any extenuating circumstance that could enable it to breach the 50% norm.

“The fact remains that backward communities are adequately represented in public employment, by virtue of reservation and also merit; which is an indication of one or other caste or community having reaped the benefits of reservation and the various beneficial welfare schemes implemented by the State; in achieving an element of social capital. There is no requirement for an enhancement of reservations, as adequate representation now exists and there is no valid ground for breach of 50% rule; which in any way is not permissible,” noted the court.

The state government said it will appeal the judgment in the Supreme Court. “The Bihar government will challenge the high court order before the Supreme Court after seeking legal opinion,” said deputy chief minister Samrat Choudhury.

The Opposition attacked the government. “I am aghast at the judgement. The BJP had been trying to scuttle the caste survey, which provided the basis of hiked quotas. It is no surprise that such a verdict has come within days of the party’s return to power at the Centre,” said Rashtriya Janata Dal leader Tejashwi Yadav.

The quota was hiked on the basis of the 2023 caste survey, a landmark exercise that physically counted castes for the first time in independent India. The move was a brainchild of chief minister Nitish Kumar who was in alliance with the RJD then. Months later, he switched sides and joined hands with the BJP.

Based on the survey, the Bihar assembly unanimously passed the Bihar Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services Amendment Bill and the Bihar Reservation (Admission In Educational Institutions) Amendment Bill, 2023 to increase the reservation quota from 50% to 65%, leaving 35% for the general category.

The new provisions increased the quota for SCs to 20%, STs to 2%, EBCs to 25% and OBCs to 18%, totaling 65% in reservations. The survey had revealed that EBCs and OBCs together made up 63.13% of the state’s population while SCs were 19.65%, STs 1.68%, and upper castes 15.52%. The notification was published on November 21, 2023.

But a clutch of petitioners challenged the law, arguing that there was no scientific analysis of the caste survey data, and that the quota increase was based solely on the lack of proportionate representation in government jobs and educational institutions. The high court echoed these concerns, highlighting the absence of a thorough analysis of the data collected.

The summary of educational data submitted by the state government, the bench pointed out, shows 100% as distributed between the various stages of education that only indicates the number of students carrying on studies in the various stages. “We cannot find a large disparity among various categories, and we cannot discern either a case of proportionate representation or an adequate representation from the above details,” it said.

Although an expert’s views or a reference to a legally constituted commission is not necessary before every decision of increasing quotas, the bench underscored the importance of such an exercise.

“What worries us is the fact of no such exercise or analysis having been done by the government or the legislature in bringing about the Amendment Acts. After the collection of data, there was a frog leap into the amendment enhancing the reservations beyond 50%, which we found was again on proportionate representation in the services of the state and educational institutions, clearly not permissible under Articles 15(4) & 16(4),” said the court.

Articles 15(4) and 16(4) enable the State to create special provisions, including reservation, for the upliftment of socially and educationally backward classes.

The court reiterated the principle that while reservations aim to break the stranglehold of a few at the expense of the many, merit cannot be entirely sacrificed. This principle underpinned the 50% reservation limit established in the Indra Sawhney judgment, said the bench, highlighting the need for excluding the creamy layer among backward classes to prevent monopolisation of reserved benefits by a few.

“On the issue relevant to the instant case, the rule of a 50% limit in reservation applies to the Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes, and Scheduled Tribes, equally applicable under Article 15(4) and Article 16(4). We see no extenuating circumstance enabling the State to breach the rule. Its increase beyond the 50% limit is bad in law based on the principles of equality emanating from the Constitution, as laid down by the wealth of precedents discussed in this judgment and which is binding on us and the State equally,” the bench declared.

Caste-based quotas are an important political subject in Bihar and were among the main issues in the recently concluded general elections. With the high court setting aside the law, it is likely to reignite the debate on reservation, potentially triggering another wave of political manoeuvring. At the same time, the verdict underscores the intricate balance between affirmative action to address historical injustices and the constitutional mandate for equality.

‘We are hurt…why is CM silent?’: Tejashwi Yadav on Patna High court order rejecting 65% quota

Tamil Nadu, at present, has a law providing for 69% reservation for identified classes. Although a challenge to this law remains pending before the top court, it has been saved so far on the ground that the law received a presidential assent in 1993 and was also put in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution, which provides only limited scope of judicial review.

A November 2022 judgment by the Supreme Court, ratifying the 10% EWS quota, had also weighed in on the 50% ceiling on reservation. The majority verdict at that time held that the 50% ceiling on reservation is “not inviolable or inflexible”, marking a paradigm shift from the thumb rule that has governed reservations in India, preventing states from enforcing quotas that take the proportion above 50%. The 3-2 view noted that the 50% ceiling applied only to the provisions of the Constitution that existed at that time and cannot extend to the 2019 amendment to any subsequent law.