The Bombay High Court rejected the petitions filed by four Maratha individuals seeking jobs under quota for poor and claimed discriminatory treatment after their applications for judicial service positions were turned down by the Maharashtra government.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Maharashtra: The Bombay High Court has dismissed the petitions of four Maratha individuals seeking employment under the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) quota in Maharashtra’s judicial services. This decision underscores the complexities surrounding reservation policies and their implementation within the state’s employment sectors.
ALSO READ: Mumbai Court Convicts Transgender Person for Kidnapping and Murdering Infant
The petitioners, represented by lawyers SB Talekar and Madhavi Ayyappan, challenged a Maharashtra government order that disqualified them from consideration for positions such as Civil Judge, Junior Division, and Judicial Magistrate, First Class (CJJD and JMFC). The government’s stance was based on the petitioners exceeding the maximum age limit outlined in the job advertisement and their ineligibility for age relaxation, as they were categorized under the EWS quota rather than as members of a backward class.
The controversy stems from the Maharashtra Public Service Commission’s (MPSC) job advertisement on February 1, 2019, which set different age limits for advocates and fresh law graduates, offering an additional 5-year relaxation for candidates from backward classes. This became a point of contention following the implementation of the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act on November 30, 2018, which included the Maratha community in the reservation quota.
However, the legal landscape shifted dramatically when the Supreme Court, in an interim order dated September 9, 2020, halted appointments under the SEBC status, although it protected appointments made before this date. The situation was further complicated on May 21, 2021, when the Supreme Court invalidated the SEBC Act, leaving the petitioners in a state of uncertainty regarding their employment status.
In response, the petitioners sought to leverage the EWS quota, introduced by the state on February 12, 2019, and further supported by a government resolution on July 15, 2021, that allowed for the conversion of SEBC status to EWS. This move was aimed at circumventing the legal hurdles posed by the invalidation of the SEBC Act.
However, the bench, comprising Justices AS Chandurkar and Jitendra Jain, clarified the distinction between EWS and SEBC categories, noting that EWS identification is based on family income and economic disadvantage, separate from the criteria used for backward class determination. The court’s decision effectively upheld the government’s refusal to entertain the Maratha petitioners’ claims under the EWS quota, given their initial application under the now-nullified SEBC Act.
This ruling not only highlights the nuanced differences between economic and social backwardness in the context of reservation policies but also reflects the judicial system’s role in interpreting and enforcing these distinctions. As the debate over reservation policies continues to evolve, this case serves as a pivotal example of the challenges faced by individuals and governments in navigating the intricate landscape of social justice and employment opportunities in India.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
