INDIA BUSINESS WORLD - MAY - JUNE 2007
The Month that was ...

OBC RESERVATION ISSUE NOW REFERRED TO LARGER BENCH

In a relief to the UPA government but with uncertainty over the implementation of reservation for OBCs in centrally funded educational institutions including IIMs and IITs from the current academic session, the Supreme Court referred the controversial issue to a larger bench.

A two judge bench comprising Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice LS Panta in its order said, "Considerable importance of the issues involved and its likely impact in the social life of the country as a whole and the complexities of the questions, it is appropriate that the matter should be heard by a larger Bench."

While referring the matter to a larger bench, the court enumerated 30 issues divided into seven parts that were required to be considered. However, the court gave liberty to the larger bench to consider more issues if required. "It is needless to say that the larger Bench hearing the matter can consider further issues or questions involved", said Justice Pasayat writing the verdict.

Some of the issues listed are: What is the meaning of the term "special provisions" in Articles 15(4) and 15(5) of the Constitution? Does it include 'quotas' by reservation of seats especially in higher educational institutions and professional and technical education (particularly those of national stature or importance and in courses categorized as speciality or super speciality). Is it a permissible measure of advancement of socially, educationally backward classes?

What is the meaning of the words "for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens" in Articles 15(4) and 15(5)? What is the yardstick for measuring educational backwardness in Clauses (4) and (5) of Article 15.

Whether substitution of the expression "socially and educationally backward classes of citizen" by "socially and economically backward classes" would result in fulfilling constitutional intentions and objectives?

Whether reservations based solely or principally upon the basis of caste are impermissible under Article 15? Whether a reservation that relies significantly on "caste" to identify its beneficiaries is inherently divisive and incompatible with the Unity and integrity of the Nation?

If the answer is yes, then how, in what way and on what basis are the beneficiaries of "special provisions" to be identified, selected, included or excluded?

Does the Union of India's method, and manner of identifying and compensating beneficiaries of 'special provisions' perpetuate caste & backwardness?

Whether, after the judgment in Indra Sawhney's case, the classification of backward classes on the basis of caste for the purposes of Article 16(4) would equally apply to Articles 15(4) and Article 15(5) of the Constitution? Whether reservation in employment for such categories also include reservation in educational institutions?