Centre pushes for quota in promotion for SCs/STs

Centre pushes for quota in promotion for SCs/STs

News:

1. Recently, the government began its push for providing “accelerated promotion with consequential seniority” for Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes (SC/ST) members in public employment.

Important facts:

2. Nagaraj  judgment 2006:

• As per Nagaraj judgment 2006 , the government cannot introduce a quota in promotion for its SC/ST employees unless following conditions are fulfilled:

a) Unless they prove that the particular Dalit community is backward.

b) Unless that community is inadequately represented.

c) Such a reservation in promotion would not affect the efficiency of public administration.

• The judgment was mean to find a “stable equilibrium between justice to the backwards, equity for the forwards and efficiency for the entire system”.
• According to the judgment three qualifiers (Backwardness, inadequacy and administrative efficiency) were meant to prevent “reverse discrimination” by State.
• It was also stated that the state will have to  see that its reservation provisions does not lead to excessiveness so as to breach the ceiling limit of 50% or obliterate the creamy layer or extend reservation indefinitely.

3. Now, the government wants refer the 2006 verdict to a larger bench for a re-examination because:

• It had argued that the 2006 verdict had created an “impossible situation” for providing accelerated promotions with consequential seniority for SC/ST communities in government services.

4. The government’s stand on this:

• The government objected to a creamy layer concept among the SC/ST.
• Government wanted a total of 22.5% (15% for SC+7.5% for ST) posts reserved for promotion for SC/ST in public employment.
• Most States did not prepare quantifiable data to show inadequacy/adequacy of representation.
• On this, Attorney General K.K Venugopal said data keeps fluctuating and it is not static and filling up vacancies was a dynamic and continuous process.

5. Last year, a two-judge Supreme Court Bench, had re-opened the issue of creamy layer and quota in promotions for SC/ST by referring them to a Constitution Bench.

6. However, the two judge bench’s referral was based on a series of questions of law such as:

• Article 16(4):- Which deals with the States power for providing for appointments or posts for “any backwards class of citizens”.
• Article 16(4A):- Which arms the state with power to make provisions for quota in promotion with consequential seniority to SC/ST communities.
• Article 16(4B):- which deals with unfilled vacancies of a year reserved for SC/ST kept from being filled up.