The Maratha Kranti Morcha Coordinator Vinod Patil has filed a review petition in the Supreme Court challenging its May 5 order cancelling the 12% quota in education and 13% in government jobs.
The state government is expected to file a review petition on June 24.
Patil has challenged the SC’s observation that the quota for Maratha community crosses the 50% ceiling. Besides, he has also prayed that the apex court needs to reconsider its decision to strike down the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Act, 2018 proposing a quota for the Maratha community. The Act was passed by the state legislature and it was later upheld by the Bombay High Court.
Patil’s move came when the pro-Maratha quota organizations threatened to launch a statewide agitation demanding restoration of reservation. The state government has announced a slew of sops including benefits under 10% economically weaker section quota to the Maratha community which constitutes 33% population of the State and only balance 15% is other than Maratha in Open Category.
Patil has argued that the State Backward Classes Commission report clearly carved out five exceptional and extraordinary circumstances for exceeding 50% reservation. However, the apex court did not take exceptional and extraordinary circumstances including erroneous exclusion of Maratha Community from reservation for long period, opposition by OBCs to include Maratha in the OBC list, affirmative action was warranted for upliftment of Maratha community due to special, exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and non-availability of jobs.
“If the reasoning of this Hon’ble Court in para 292 is to be accepted that Maratha occupies 33.23% of the open posts, then with the very same reasoning, the open category (which constitutes around 15% of total population) would occupy 67%. This statistics if considered, then there would be complete disproportionate and/or excessive representation of the open category to their miniscule population as it exists,’’ said Patil. He noted that the apex court has been a little selective in considering material on social backwardness and educational backwardness.
Scope for interpretation
According to Vinod Patil, the 102nd Amendment of the Constitution did not affect the power of the State Legislature to determine socially and educationally backward category or backward classes of citizens as envisaged by Articles 15 (4) and 16(4) of the Constitution.
‘’The effective authority of the State behind identification of reserved class has been thus taken away and the said reasoning of the majority judgment overlooks the effect that if the 102nd amendment is so understood then it takes away a constitutional power of State under art 15 & 16 which is in part III of the constitution thereby the same would completely destroy the basic structure /affect federal polity,’’ submitted Patil.
