The Author, Advocate G. Natarajan, has a decade of experience in the Customs and Central Excise department and more than 17 years of practice in all benches of CESTAT and various High Courts and Supreme Court. He is a Senior Partner of the firm M/s. Swamy Associates.
Reservation of posts for backward classes in Government appointments and in educational institutions owes its origin to pre-constitution days.
Article 14 of the Constitution proclaims equality before law and equal protection of the laws as a fundamental right. Even the Preamble to the Constitution seeks to secure, among other things, Equality of status and opportunity to its citizens.
But, Equality as an abstract concept, would do more harm than good and the following oft quoted observation would explain it more emphatically.
“In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep
under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.”
So, it is by now well settled that the reservations policies pursued by the Government in the sphere of public employment and educational opportunities are not an assault on right to equality but a means to achieve equality.
The Constitutional makers have realised the importance of reservation in public appointments and enacted clause (4) in Article 16 of the Constitution, providing for reservation in public employments, for any backward class of citizens.
The very first notable judicial pronouncement of the Supreme Court on reservation is in the case of Champakam Dorairajan[1] arising from the then State of Madras in 1951, where the communal G.O. providing for caste based reservation in medical and engineering colleges was set aside.
This prompted the Government to bring in the first constitutional amendment, which introduced Clause (4) in Article 15, enabling Government to make special provisions for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens, as well as Scheduled Casts and Scheduled Tribes.
In the year 1962, when the reservations reached a level of 68 % in the State of Karnataka for admission to educational institutions, in the case of M.R. Balaji[2], the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court has laid down that the quantum of reservation should normally be less than 50 %.
The issue of reservation has occupied considerable time of the Courts and suffice to say that there were several judgements from various High Courts and the Supreme Court in different shades.
Then came the report of the second National Commission for Backward Classes, aka the Mandal Commission and its implementation by the Government, which paved way for 27 % reservation for other backward communities, which were identified based on various paraments, caste, among them being the primary one.
With the already existing 22.5 % reservation in favour of SC/STs, the total quantum of reservation became 49.5 % at the centre level and it is for the first time reservation was introduced in public appointments under the Union Government for other backward classes, which hitherto was applicable only for SC/STs.
Originally Published at https://www.latestlaws.com at here : https://www.latestlaws.com/articles/supreme-court-judgments-on-reservations-an-analysis/