New Delhi, Mar 7 (UNI) The Supreme Court today reserved its judgement on the issue of interim stay against the government notification providing 27.5 per cent reservation to OBCs in admission to central educational institutions from the academic session 2007-08.
Senior counsel Fali S Nariman and P P Rao contended before a Bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat and Lokeshwar Singh Panta that the present reservation policy of the government was based on 1931 population figures which has no reference to caste-based classification of the population.
Mr Nariman, pleading for the suspension of the implementation of the notification for one year submitted before the Bench, said no reservation can be provided without determining the social and educational backwardness of the beneficiary and the government has no methodology of identification of the socially and educationally backward sections of caste or class in the population.
Mr Nariman made it that clear that he was not against reservations provided to SCs/STs and the government can continue with it. He also contended, ''There is no ex-facie identification of OBCs or that of creamy layer for exclusion from the benefits of reservation.
The petitioners also challenged the assertion of Mandal commission that the percentage of population of OBCs in the country is 52 per cent.
When the court sought response of the petitioners to the suggestion that the government will be allowed to go ahead with its reservation policy from the economic session 2007-08 subject to exclusion of creamy layer, Mr Nariman objected to it pleading for suspension of the implementation of the government's notification till the next acedemic sesion 2008-09.
Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam, appearing for the government, however, justified the government's policy of providing 27.5 per cent reservation to OBCs and contended that educational and economical backwardness was caused and perpetuated by social backwardness which is due to caste-based exploitation and oppresssion which has been the reality of Indian social life for centuries.
He also contended that the reservation provided in annual permitted strength of an institution, did not take away rights of general category candidates and hence the apprehension of the petitioners on this count were without any basis.
He also quoted extensively from the nine-judge Bench judgement of this court in Mandal commission case in 1992 to impress upon the court that all objections of the petitioners with regard to reservations for OBCs had been considered and rejected in the Mandal Comnmission judgement.
The Court, however, directed the parties to submit their written arguements if any, by March 12.
UNI
Senior counsel Fali S Nariman and P P Rao contended before a Bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat and Lokeshwar Singh Panta that the present reservation policy of the government was based on 1931 population figures which has no reference to caste-based classification of the population.
Mr Nariman, pleading for the suspension of the implementation of the notification for one year submitted before the Bench, said no reservation can be provided without determining the social and educational backwardness of the beneficiary and the government has no methodology of identification of the socially and educationally backward sections of caste or class in the population.
Mr Nariman made it that clear that he was not against reservations provided to SCs/STs and the government can continue with it. He also contended, ''There is no ex-facie identification of OBCs or that of creamy layer for exclusion from the benefits of reservation.
The petitioners also challenged the assertion of Mandal commission that the percentage of population of OBCs in the country is 52 per cent.
When the court sought response of the petitioners to the suggestion that the government will be allowed to go ahead with its reservation policy from the economic session 2007-08 subject to exclusion of creamy layer, Mr Nariman objected to it pleading for suspension of the implementation of the government's notification till the next acedemic sesion 2008-09.
Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam, appearing for the government, however, justified the government's policy of providing 27.5 per cent reservation to OBCs and contended that educational and economical backwardness was caused and perpetuated by social backwardness which is due to caste-based exploitation and oppresssion which has been the reality of Indian social life for centuries.
He also contended that the reservation provided in annual permitted strength of an institution, did not take away rights of general category candidates and hence the apprehension of the petitioners on this count were without any basis.
He also quoted extensively from the nine-judge Bench judgement of this court in Mandal commission case in 1992 to impress upon the court that all objections of the petitioners with regard to reservations for OBCs had been considered and rejected in the Mandal Comnmission judgement.
The Court, however, directed the parties to submit their written arguements if any, by March 12.
UNI
Oneindia Login