newsroompost
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • twitter

No Maratha quota in college admissions, jobs for now: SC refers matter to larger bench

The Bombay High Court had on June 27, 2019, observed that the 50 per cent cap on total reservations imposed by the Supreme Court could be exceeded in exceptional circumstances.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday said that there will be no Martha quota for jobs or college admissions for now and referred the hearing on a batch of plea challenging the constitutional validity of a Maharashtra law granting Maratha reservation in education and jobs to a larger bench.

The Chief Justice of India, SA Bobde, will take a call on the constitution of the larger bench, the court said in response to petitions that challenged the law, arguing that the total quota now exceeds the 50 per cent cap set by the top court.

A bench headed by Justice L Nageshwar Rao, in its interim order, said that Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sharad Arvind Bobde will later decide the larger bench and its composition for hearing the matter related to the Maratha reservation.

Supreme Court

The bench held that no Maratha quota will be granted for jobs and admissions for the session 2020-21 and said that admissions to post graduate courses in the state will not to be altered.

The bench was hearing two appeals, including one filed by J Laxman Rao Patil challenging the Bombay High Court order that upheld the constitutional validity of the quota for the Maratha community in education and government jobs in the state.

The Bombay High Court had on June 27, 2019, observed that the 50 per cent cap on total reservations imposed by the Supreme Court could be exceeded in exceptional circumstances.

Another appeal filed by advocate Sanjeet Shukla, a representative of ‘Youth for Equality’, said the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2018, enacted to grant reservation to the Maratha community people in jobs and education, breached the 50 per cent ceiling on reservation fixed by the top court in its judgment in the Indira Sawhney case.