The Supreme Court on Monday asked whether they were in favor of increasing the caste-based reservation by more than 50 per cent in the 1992 nine-judge bench, known as the Indra Sawhney Case.
A five-judge constitution bench of the apex court implicated one of the many questions considering the constitutional validity of the Maharashtra law of 2018, in which the Maratha community was socially abolished with 16 per cent reservation in jobs and admissions. The law was brought under consideration by the Bombay HC in June 2019, but the reservation amount was reduced by 12 per cent in admissions and 13 per cent in jobs.
With the introduction of the act, reservation benefits in the state exceeded 50 per cent, apparently ruled by a nine-judge bench in the Sawhney case.
By this decision, the Supreme Court in 1992 approved 27 per cent quota for the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) except the creamy layer. The law was challenged as unconstitutional in petitions challenging the Maharashtra law as it limited the judicial-fixed ceiling to 50 per cent.
On Monday, a five-judge bench ofJustices Ashok Bhushan, L Nageswara Rao, S Abdul Nazer, Hemant Gupta and S Ravindra Bhat said, “The questions we propose to consider are whether Indira Sawhney v. Union of A verdict should be given in the case. India (1992) needs to be referred to a larger bench or revisited by a larger bench in light of subsequent constitutional amendments, decisions and the changed social dynamics of society. ‘
