Context: The Supreme Court of India has recently emphasised that reservations must not be granted solely on religion.
Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: Constitutional and Legal Framework for Reservations.
Background: The Calcutta High Court had concluded that religion was the “sole criterion for declaring certain castes among the Muslim community as OBC”. The judgment arose a debate around the issue and prompted a review on how reservations are determined.
Present Constitutional and Legal Framework:
- Article 15(4): Enables the State to make special provisions for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes.
- Article 16(4): Provides that the State can enact legislation for the reservation of posts in the government sector or jobs in favour of the backward classes of citizens, which the State considers to have not been adequately represented in the services of the State.
- Indira Sawhney Judgment: The Supreme Court in Indira Sawhney v. The Union of India upheld the constitutionality of reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBScs) in public employment, capping the reservation at 50%. The court emphasised that identification of backwardness should be based on social and educational criteria rather than religion.
Previous rulings in this Context:
- MR Balaji case (1962): The SC held that Muslims/Christians/Sikhs are not excluded for the purpose of conferring reservations under Article 15(4) or 16(4).
- The court further held that it is not unlikely that these communities can be socially backward, so even though caste is considered to be the relevant criteria for determining backwardness in Hindu community, it cannot be made the sole criteria.
- Indira Sawhney case: The SC held that in certain states, Muslim communities as a whole can be identified as backwards (based on their social and educational conditions). (E.g., Karnataka, Kerala)
- T Muralidhar Rao vs State of AP, 2004: The State while discharging its constitutional obligation cannot make any distinction between one group of citizens and others on the ground of religion, faith or belief.
- B Archana Reddy vs State of AP (2005): HC struck down the ordinance for extending the benefits of reservation on the ground that the benefit could not be extended to the whole community without proper identification of social backwardness of Muslims by the Commission.
- Telangana tried to pass 12% reservation for OBC Muslims based on G Sudhir Commission report. However, this was struck down, since it breached the 50% limit set by Indra Sawhney judgement (1992) and the Central Government denied its inclusion in the Ninth schedule.
Various Committees recommendations in this context:
- Justice Rajinder Sachar Committee, 2006: The Muslim community was almost as backward as SCs and STs and more backward than non-Muslim OBCs.
- Justice Ranganath Misra Committee, 2007: It suggested a 15% reservation for minorities, with 10% specifically for Muslims.
- Executive Order, 2012: The GOI issued an order providing a 4.5% reservation for minorities within the existing 27% OBC quota.
The Supreme Court’s stand reinforces that social and educational backwardness must be the basis for reservations, not religious identity.