Make backward panel report public: High court tells Maharashtra government

The state government has given an undertaking to the HC that it will not make any appointments under the 16% reservation carved out by the government for the Maratha community

The state government has given an undertaking to the Bombay high court (HC) that till January 23, 2019, it will not make any appointments under the 16% reservation carved out by the government for the Maratha community. The state also submitted that it was willing to submit in court the backward commission report based on which reservation has been extended to the Marathas. The court has now directed the state to give the commission’s report to the petitioners after removing sensitive portions, so that they can file their replies.

The court has directed the state to give the commission’s report to the petitioners after removing sensitive portions, so that they can file their replies. (HT PHOTO)

On Wednesday, chief justice Naresh Patil and justice M S Karnik were hearing public interest litigations challenging the decision of the previous and current administrations to implement a 16% reservation for the Maratha community. Its decision to make the Maharashtra State Commission for the Backward Classes’ (MSCBC) report available to petitioners is significant because the government shied away from tabling the report in the winter session of the state legislature and had only tabled an action-taken report on the same. The MSCBC report forms the basis of the 16% reservation granted to the Maratha community. Once the report is public, the socio-economic data of the community survey by the commission will come under public scrutiny. Several Other Backward Class groups had put a question mark on this data.

In court, state counsel Dr VA Thorat read out the affidavit on Wednesday, in which the state said there was no need for a stay on the mega recruitment drive – petitioners had objected to the Maratha quota being applied to this initiative since it was declared before a quota for Marathas was finalised – since the drive was a time-consuming process. He requested the court postpone the hearing to January 23, by which time all petitioners should have filed their replies and carried out any necessary amendments to their petitions.

The petitioners agreed to the date for the hearing suggested by the state counsel, but expressed concerns about the recruitment drive. Senior advocate Pradeep Sancheti, appearing for lead petitioner advocate Sanjeet Shukla, did not object to the suggested date for the hearing, but insisted no appointments under the Maratha quota be made in the interim. He also urged the court to issue orders against the Maratha reservation in light of other courts having struck down such reservations when they went beyond the 50% limit ordered by the Supreme Court last year.

Advocate Gunaratan Sadavarte appearing for Dr Jishri Patil, a member of the non-governmental organisation Indian Constitutionalist Circle, agreed with Sancheti and pointed out that while the state had announced the implementation of the reservation on November 30, the affidavit stated that appointments would be done based on whether or not the statute is cleared by the court.

After hearing the petitioners’ submissions, the bench acceded to the state’s request of having the next hearing on January 23, 2019.

Advocate general Ashutosh Kumbhakoni assured the court that no appointments would be made under the Maratha quota and that the appointment of 16% of positions that are part of the mega recruitment drive would be subject to the court order.