SC Questions Maharashtra's Local Body Reservations, Seeks State's Response

The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Maharashtra government on a plea seeking to quash the Banthiya Commission report for failing to provide political reservation to backward classes in Local Bodies. The petition argues the state granted reservations without the mandatory empirical inquiry into political backwardness, violating the 'Triple Test' established by the constitution bench in the K. Krishna Murthy case. It contends the government wrongly equated political backwardness with social and educational backwardness by mechanically relying on pre-existing data. The plea seeks directions to form a new commission to conduct a fresh study to identify politically backward classes as per constitutional mandates.

Key Points: SC Notice to Maharashtra on Plea to Quash Banthiya Commission Report

  • Plea challenges Banthiya Commission report legality
  • SC issues notice to Maharashtra government
  • Report accused of skipping political backwardness study
  • Violation of 'Triple Test' from Krishna Murthy case alleged
3 min read

Plea in SC seeks to quash Banthiya Commission report for failing to consider political reservation in LBs; SC issues notice to Maharashtra

Supreme Court seeks Maharashtra's response on plea challenging local body reservation report for failing to conduct empirical study on political backwardness.

"The Commission erroneously relied on voter lists and State and Central SEBC/OBC lists as a baseline without conducting an independent analysis. - Plea"

New Delhi, January 27

The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought the Maharashtra government's response to a plea challenging the legality of the Banthiya Commission report and seeking to quash the same on the grounds that it fails to provide political reservation to the "backward class" in the Local Bodies.

The plea filed by Youth For Equality Foundation also seeks directions to the Maharashtra government to form a new dedicated commission to conduct an empirical study on political backwardness in all local bodies in the State and to identify politically backward classes in terms of Articles 243D (6) and 243T (6) (provisions mandating reservations for backward castes/women in Panchayat and Local Body elections) of the Constitution of India.

After hearing submissions by Senior Advocate Gopal Sankarnarayanan appearing for the petitioner organisation today, a bench led by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant issued notice to the Maharashtra government.

The plea has alleged that the Maharashtra government granted these reservations without conducting the mandatory empirical inquiry into political backwardness and without satisfying the Triple Test laid down by this Court in the case of K. Krishna Murthy v. Union of India.

A constitution-bench in K Krishna Murthy held that reservations in local bodies under Articles 243-D and 243-T are constitutionally distinct from reservations in education and employment, as political backwardness is different from social or economic backwardness.

To ensure that such reservations are constitutionally valid, the Court laid down a mandatory 'Triple Test' which mandates that the State must appoint a dedicated commission to conduct a rigorous empirical inquiry into political backwardness, determine the extent of reservation for each local body based on actual under-representation and ensure that total reservation does not exceed 50 per cent of seats.

The plea contends that instead of undertaking a fresh and contemporaneous study, the Maharashtra government relied mechanically on pre-existing Social and Economic Backwards Classes/Other Backwards Classes data and the 2022 Banthia Commission Report.

Thus, it is argued that the Maharashtra government, in violation of settled constitutional law, wrongly equated political backward classes (PBCs) with socially and educationally backward classes (SEBCs).

"The Commission erroneously relied on (i) voter lists and (ii) State and Central SEBC/OBC lists as a baseline without conducting an independent analysis of political representation. This mechanical adoption is fundamentally flawed and ignores the fact that barriers to political participation differ fundamentally from barriers to education or employment, as held by this Hon'ble Court," the plea stated.

"Besides, the methodology of using voter lists to conflate surnames with caste membership is wholly arbitrary, unscientific and unconstitutional and completely overlooks the fact that surnames are not a definitive or legal proxy for a "backward class", leading to skewed and unreliable estimates, it added.

Moreover, the petition underlines that the Banthiya Commissions' recommendation to de-reserve 33,834 seats in the States' Local Bodies is based on an incorrect identification of beneficiaries and could result in potential disenfranchisement of historically marginalised groups.

- ANI

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
Using voter lists and surnames to decide caste? That is so outdated and unscientific! In my own village, people from the same family have different surnames. This kind of lazy methodology will only hurt the very people reservation is meant to help. SC notice is justified.
A
Aditya G
While the principle is correct, I hope this doesn't become another tool for endless litigation that delays local body elections. Grassroots democracy suffers when seats are stuck in legal battles. The state must act swiftly to form a proper commission now.
M
Meera T
De-reserving 33,000+ seats based on flawed data is shocking! It could wipe out years of progress for backward communities at the local level. Representation in panchayats is where real power change begins. The SC must ensure no community is unfairly disenfranchised.
K
Karthik V
Respectfully, I think we need to move beyond caste-based reservations in politics. It creates dependency and vote bank politics. Let's focus on universal education and economic development so that anyone qualified can contest, regardless of background. Just my two cents.
S
Sarah B
As an observer, the constitutional distinction made by the court between social/economic and political backwardness is fascinating and seems very logical. The mechanics of power are different. Hope Maharashtra conducts a proper, data-driven study as directed.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50