SC to hear on Aug 22 Guj govt plea on 10 pc quota for poor

The Supreme Court today agreed to hear the Gujarat government's plea challenging the high court order quashing its ordinance providing 10 per cent quota for economically backward among the unreserved category, including the agitating Patel community.
A bench comprising Chief Justice T S Thakur and justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud listed the matter for August 22 after Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi submitted that he would not be available on a date already fixed for hearing of the plea.
While quashing the ordinance, the high court had stayed the operation of its order by two weeks on the request of the state government to enable it to file an appeal in the apex court.

Terming the ordinance issued on May 1 as "inappropriate and unconstitutional", the high court had rejected the state government's argument that it is a classification under the general category and not the reserved category and held that it will breach the 50 per cent quota cap set up by the Supreme Court.
The court had observed that 10 per cent reservation for poor among the unreserved category takes the total quota beyond 50 per cent, which is not permitted as per the apex court's earlier decision.
The high court had also said that the government took the decision without any study or scientific data.

Petitioners Dayaram Verma, Ravjibhai Manani, Dulari Basarge and Gujarat Parents' Association had separately challenged the ordinance declaring reservation of 10 per cent seats to candidates belonging to the unreserved category with family income cap of Rs 6 lakh annually in government jobs and educational institutions.

Their petitions were heard together.
The state government had said that the reservation is actually "a further classification in the general, open, unreserved category" and does not violate either the Supreme Court order or the constitutional provisions.
The state government, in its affidavit, said the ordinance does not violate provisions of the Constitution nor does it go against the apex court orders.