Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has struck down provisions of a 2022 Karnataka law that increased reservation for Scheduled Castes (SCs) from 15% to 17% and for Scheduled Tribes (STs) from 3% to 7%. The court held that the enhanced quotas breached the 50% reservation ceiling and violated constitutional provisions on equality.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice K S Hemalekha ruled that Section 3 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Seats in Educational Institutions and of Appointments or Posts in the Services under the State) Act, 2022, was unconstitutional to the extent that it pushed total reservation beyond the prescribed limit.
The judgment also struck down Section 4, which provided enhanced reservation for SCs and STs in state government services, citing violations of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
The decision has implications for reservation policies in Karnataka, particularly in education and public employment. The state government has said it will examine available legal options, including an appeal before the Supreme Court.
Why Did the Karnataka High Court Strike Down the Law?
The court held that Section 3 of the 2022 Act violated Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution insofar as it raised the aggregate reservation beyond 50%.
The bench stated that the provision was being struck down because it breached the constitutional ceiling. It also invalidated Section 4, which dealt with enhanced reservation for SCs and STs in state government appointments and services.
The petitions challenged the legislation because the combined reservation for SCs, STs and Other Backward Classes (OBCs) increased from 50% to 56%.
The ruling addresses the constitutional validity of the enhanced quota provisions. It does not, by itself, mean that the court rejected the need to improve representation for SCs and STs; its decision focused on the legality of the provisions that exceeded the reservation ceiling.
What Is the 50% Reservation Ceiling?
The 50% reservation ceiling was laid down by the Supreme Court in its landmark 1992 judgment in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India. The principle has subsequently been considered and upheld in several court decisions.
Reservation policies aim to improve representation for historically disadvantaged communities in education and public employment. However, such policies must operate within the constitutional framework and relevant judicial precedents.
The Karnataka government’s 2022 legislation increased the SC quota from 15% to 17% and the ST quota from 3% to 7%. With the existing OBC reservation, the overall share rose from 50% to 56%.
The High Court found that the provisions extending reservation beyond the 50% ceiling could not stand in their existing form.
Two Petitions Challenged the Karnataka Reservation Law
The judgment followed two petitions questioning the constitutional validity of the 2022 legislation.
One petition was filed by Mahendra Kumar Mitra, the Karnataka state president of the Dr Ambedkar Scheduled Castes Federation.
The other petition was filed by Sagar H R, Prajwal Kumar D and Purushotham Gowda G M, all civil engineering graduates. They had applied for the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP).
The petitioners challenged the law that increased the overall reservation for SCs, STs and OBCs from 50% to 56%. The court examined the provisions in light of constitutional equality requirements and the established reservation ceiling.
How Did Karnataka Introduce the Enhanced Quota?
The Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes reservation law was passed during the BJP government led by then Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai.
The Governor gave assent to the legislation on January 11, 2023, and it was published in the Karnataka Gazette on January 12, 2023.
The law followed recommendations and reports concerning the representation of SCs and STs. These included work associated with the Justice (Retd) Nagamohan Das Commission and a committee headed by former High Court judge Justice Subhash B Adi.
The legislation sought to increase the reservation available to SCs and STs in educational institutions and state government services. However, the enhanced provisions faced legal challenges over their effect on the overall reservation percentage.
Karnataka Government Considers Legal Options
Deputy Chief Minister G Parameshwara described the judgment as a serious development with far-reaching implications for social justice, educational opportunities and public employment in Karnataka.
He said the state respected the judiciary and the constitutional framework but also raised questions about the political responsibility of the previous state government and the response of the BJP-led Union government.
Parameshwara urged the Prime Minister and the Centre to review the 50% reservation ceiling and consider appropriate constitutional and legislative measures. He also called for the state’s request to include the reservation measure in the Ninth Schedule to be examined without delay.
He said the government wanted reservation measures that were legally sustainable, socially meaningful and effectively implemented, rather than symbolic announcements.
The Deputy Chief Minister added that Karnataka would examine all available legal remedies, including an appeal before the Supreme Court. He also said the government would seek to protect ongoing recruitment and educational opportunities in accordance with the law.
What the Judgment Means for Education and Public Employment
The ruling places the legal status of the enhanced SC/ST reservation provisions at the centre of Karnataka’s next steps. It is particularly relevant to admission policies in educational institutions and appointments to state government posts, the two areas covered by the law.
The state government’s proposed examination of legal remedies may determine whether it challenges the High Court’s decision before the Supreme Court or pursues other constitutionally available measures.
For candidates seeking government jobs and students applying to educational institutions, the practical implications will depend on the legal steps that follow and the applicable rules and directions.
The case also highlights the challenge governments face when attempting to expand representation through reservation policies while complying with constitutional requirements and judicial precedents.
The next stage of the legal process will be important in determining how Karnataka proceeds with its enhanced SC/ST quota and what measures, if any, can be implemented within the constitutional framework.
Read also:Karnataka HC Seeks Timeline for Civil Service Board in Compliance with 2013 Supreme Court Directions
