ForumIAS announcing GS Foundation Program for UPSC CSE 2025-26 from 10th August. Click Here for more information.
Source-This post on the issue of ceiling on job reservation has been created based on the article “Creamy layer should be kept out, but the ceiling on quota is artificial” published in “The Hindu” on 24 June 2024.
UPSC Syllabus-GS Paper-2- Indian Constitution—Historical Underpinnings, Evolution, Features, Amendments, Significant Provisions and Basic Structure.
Context- The Patna High Court invalidated Bihar’s decision to increase reservation quotas for various communities. The judgment was based on the strict application of the 50% ceiling on total reservations, as established by previous judicial precedents.
The court cited the Indra Sawhney (1992) case, which clarified that adequate representation does not mean proportionate representation.
The Bihar government amended its quota law to increase reservations. The decision was supported by a Caste Survey and was intended to achieve “proportionate equality.”
Why did the High Court reject the state government’s argument?
Read more- Reservation Judgements: An overemphasis on merit
What are the issues with the Patna High Court’s decision?
1) The court rejected the state’s argument about special circumstances justifying the quota increase. However, the court’s interpretation of “extraordinary situations” was too narrow, focusing only on geographical remoteness.
2) It raises the question about whether a state with poor human and social development indicators should be prevented from enhancing its social justice initiatives.
What should be the way forward?
1) Socio-economic Development- Revising the lists of Backward Classes (BC) or Extremely Backward Communities (EBC) based on progress made over decades could be justified. However, completely preventing efforts to increase representation for historically deprived groups may not be fair.
2) Revision of Ceiling Limit- The 50% cap on reservations may be an arbitrary restriction. This implies the necessity for a more refined approach in balancing social justice with legal constraints.
Question for practice
Why was the state government’s argument rejected by the High Court? What steps should be taken next?
