Karnataka bid to breach 50% quota cap awaits tough judicial test

NEW DELHI: Any decision taken by the Karnataka government on increasing reservation on the basis of its caste census for socially and educationally backward communities and those who are inadequately represented will have a tough time passing judicial muster, as many such laws framed by other states have failed.

Though Supreme Court, while upholding Centre's decision to provide 10% quota for economically weaker sections (EWS) by a 3-2 majority, had said "50% cap on quota is not inflexible and inviolable for all times to come", the controversial issue cannot be said to have been authoritatively adjudicated with the majority verdict adding a rider that the cap applied only to SC/ST/OBC reservation and the dissent verdict of two judges refusing to go into the issue of the cap as the matter was pending in court for adjudication in case of Tamil Nadu.

"Reservation for EWS of citizens up to 10%, in addition to the existing reservations, does not result in violation of any essential feature of the Constitution and does not cause any damage to the basic structure of the Constitution on account of breach of the ceiling limit of 50% because that ceiling limit itself is not inflexible and in any case, applies only to the reservations envisaged by Articles 15(4), 15(5) and 16(4) of the Constitution," the majority verdict penned by Justice Dinesh Maheshwari had said.

In a dissent note, Justice Ravindra Bhat had said he was not going into the question of violation of 50% rule as it was the principal ground of challenge on the validity of Tamil Nadu Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1993, which was pending in court. "The view of the members of this bench constituting the majority - that creation of another class which can be a recipient of up to 10% of reservation, over and above 50%, which is permitted under Articles 15(4) or 16(4), in my considered opinion, therefore, has a direct bearing on the likely outcome in the challenge in that proceeding," he had said.

In a note of caution, Justice Bhat said if the ambit of reservation kept increasing, then the right to equality would be reduced to right to reservation and the observations of B R Ambedkar had to to be kept in mind that reservations were to be seen as temporary and exceptional or else they would "eat up the rule of equality".

In a landmark judgment in Indra Sawhney case in 1992, SC had held that 50% quota shall be the rule and can be increased only in case of extraordinary situations "inherent in the great diversity of this country and the people".

In recent years, many state govts attempted to breach the cap but they failed to pass judicial muster. On the basis of a caste census's findings, Bihar govt increased quota for reserved classes from 50% to 65%. However, Patna high court last year declared the law unconstitutional and the appeal against the HC ruling is pending in the SC which refused to stay the order.

Chhattisgarh govt had also amended reservation rules, slashing the quota for Scheduled Castes by 4% (16% to 12%) and raising reservation for Scheduled Tribes by 12% - from 20% to 32%. OBC reservation was kept unchanged at 14%, taking the total reservation to 58%. But the HC in 2022 quashed the decision for breach of the cap.