Quota for Marathas: SC not to interfere with Bombay HC order

The Supreme Court refused to interfere with the Bombay High Court's interim order staying reservation for Marathas in government jobs and education institutions

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Dec 19 2014 | 2:22 AM IST
The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to interfere with an interim order of the Bombay High Court by which the decision of Maharashtra government to provide 16 per cent reservation to Marathas in jobs and education institutions was stayed.

“It is just an interim order, let the Bombay High Court decide it,” a bench headed by Chief Justice H L Dattu said, while refusing to hear a batch of petitions filed by various parties, including the Maharashtra government, on the issue.

Earlier, the high court had stayed the implementation of the controversial decision of the previous  Congress-NCP government in Maharashtra to provide reservation to Marathas in government jobs and education institutions announced ahead of the Assembly election.

The bench, also comprising Justice A K Sikri, said, “However, we request the high court to dispose of the writ petition as expeditiously as possible.”

On being told that the single-judge bench of the high court had already opined his views conclusively on the issue in the interim order itself, the bench said the judge concerned will not hear it now and the plea will be heard by some other judge of the high court.

The bench then disposed of the matter.

Earlier, the high court had also stayed the decision to provide five per cent reservation to Muslims in government service but had allowed quotas for them in education institutions.

The high court had said that as per the Supreme Court directions, reservation cannot exceed 50 per cent of the total seats, and the Congress-NCP government had, in the run up to the Assembly polls, raised it to 73 per cent by announcing 16 per cent quotas for Marathas and five per cent for Muslims in government jobs and education institutions.

The state government had contended in the high court that the two communities were socially, educationally and economically backward, saying that its decision was based on the report of a committee headed by former minister Narayan Rane formed to look into the issue.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Dec 19 2014 | 12:49 AM IST

Next Story