On March 7, Maharashtra formally requested that the Chief Justice consolidate all petitions related to Maratha reservations.The PIL seeks to invalidate the Maharashtra State Reservation Act 2024, which provides a 10 percent reservation to the Maratha community under the Socially and Educationally Backward Class (SEBC), alleging that it discriminates and breaches Articles 14, 15, 16, and 21 of the Constitution, ensuring equality, non-discrimination, equal employment opportunities, and the right to life.
Mumbai, Maharashtra: On March 7, 2024, the Bombay High Court recently rebuked a petitioner in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) against the new Maratha reservation in Maharashtra. The petitioner tried to impeach Chief Minister Eknath Shinde and the state through the Secretary (Legislation).
READ ALSO: Justice Sanjiv Khanna: Cross-Border Trade Requires Fair and Efficient Adjudication
Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Arif Doctor questioned why the Chief Minister and the legislature were included as respondents. They said the necessary party was missing and that the addition of parties should be done through the department secretary.
However, the PIL aims to cancel the Maharashtra State Reservation Act 2024, which gives 10 percent reservation to the Maratha community under the Socially and Educationally Backward Class (SEBC). It claims the Act is discriminatory and violates Articles 14, 15, 16, and 21 of the Constitution, which promise equality, no discrimination, equal job opportunities, and the right to life.
Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Arif Doctor said,
“How can these people be impleaded as respondents? Why is the legislature added? The proper party is absent. It has to be admitted through the department secretary and not through the legislature.”
Advocate General Birendra Saraf, representing the state, asked for time to respond to the PIL. He also mentioned that an application would be submitted to consolidate all petitions against the new Maratha reservation, as there are several similar petitions. The Chief Justice agreed, saying a decision would be made next month, and adjourned the PIL hearing.
Referring to a 2021 Supreme Court ruling that canceled an earlier Act giving reservations to Marathas, the plea argues that the community isn’t socially backward. It also says there aren’t enough reasons for the reservation and that it was rushed due to protests, especially by Manoj Jarange-Patil.
The Act was approved on February 20, with the Governor’s agreement on February 26, based on suggestions from the Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission (MSBCC), led by retired High Court judge Justice Sunil Shukre. The MSBCC’s report said that Marathas have 28 percent of the state’s population and cited their extraordinary backwardness, justifying reservations exceeding the 50 percent limit.
However, other Maratha petitioners wanted to be impleded as respondents, which the court allowed.
