Want to be a
Soolegal Member
Team SoOLEGAL
26 Sep 2018 12:00pm

No need to refer to 2006 verdict on SC/ST quota for promotions, says SC

0
0
5
0

The constitution bench of the Supreme Court today refused to refer to its 2006 judgment in M Nagaraj case, which ended quotas in promotions for Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST), to a larger (seven-judge) bench.

The SC bench also ruled out that there was no need to provide “quantifiable data to show the communities needed the affirmative action”.

The Apex Court, in the 2006 M Nagraj case, had observed that states are bound to provide quantifiable data on the backwardness of SC/ST, the facts about their poor representation in government jobs and the overall administrative efficiency, before providing them with reservations in jobs promotions.

However, the Centre had alleged that the M Nagraj verdict had put unnecessary conditions in granting quota benefits to the SC/ST employees, and had sought its reconsideration by a larger bench.

The Centre had strongly backed restoring quotas in promotions for SCs and STs, arguing that these communities had suffered social inequalities for years.

During the hearing, the Centre’s top law officer KK Venugopal had argued that it was unfeasible to adhere to the conditions laid down by the top court because the data will keep on fluctuating and filling up vacancies is a dynamic and continuous process.

The top court’s 2006 verdict effectively implied that employees belonging to the SC/ST communities could get guaranteed promotions only if the government is able to provide data that demonstrate the “compelling reasons” such as backwardness of the community and their inadequate representation in government.

In fact, the Dalit groups had argued that the court’s 2006 verdict had adversely affected the career progression of SC/ST employees owing to an inherent bias against them.


Tagged: Scheduled Castes Scheduled Tribes Government Job Quota SC and ST Reservation SC and ST SC Reservation Verdict Supreme Court of India
Did you find this write-up useful? YES 1 NO 0
Active Members view all

New Members view all