A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra scheduled the final hearing for September but denied any interim relief.
NEW DELHI: Today (29th July): The Supreme Court declined to stay the Patna High Court’s ruling that annulled the increase in reservation for Backward Classes, Extremely Backward Classes, and Scheduled Castes and Tribes (SC/STs) in Bihar from 50% to 65% in public employment and educational institutions.
READ ALSO: Patna HC Scraps Bihar’s 65% Reservation Policy for Backward Classes, EBCs, SCs, and STs
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra scheduled the final hearing for September but denied any interim relief.
“We will list in September. No interim relief [at this stage],”
stated CJI Chandrachud.
The Supreme Court was addressing an appeal by the Bihar Government against the High Court’s decision.
Background
On June 20, the High Court had set aside the law after multiple petitions argued that the quota increase violated citizens’ right to equal employment and educational opportunities.
The High Court invalidated the Bihar Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (for Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Classes) Amendment Act, 2023, and The Bihar (In admission in Educational Institutions) Reservation (Amendment) Act, 2023, declaring them unconstitutional and in violation of the equality clauses under Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution.
READ ALSO: BREAKING| Bihar Challenges Patna HC Ruling on 65% Reservation Law in Supreme Court
In 2023, the Bihar State legislature amended the Bihar Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (For Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1991, after data indicated that SC/ST and other backward classes were underrepresented in government service.
The amended law increased reservations for these groups to 65%, reducing open merit category opportunities to 35%.
The High Court, citing the caste survey report, noted that backward communities were already adequately represented in public employment due to existing reservations and merit. The Court suggested that the State should reconsider the reservation percentage within the 50% limit and exclude the ‘creamy layer’ from benefits.
This led to the appeal to the Supreme Court.
Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, representing Bihar, urged the Supreme Court to stay the ruling.
However, the Court refused.
“Please issue notice on interim relief then,” Divan requested alternatively.
The Court again declined.
“We will grant leave and list for final hearing,” stated the Court.
Case Title: State of Bihar and anr v. Gaurav Kumar and Anr
