Violates equality: Karnataka High Court strikes down SC-ST quota breaching 50% limit

The High Court held that the Karnataka law was unconstitutional as it breached the 50 per cent reservation ceiling, violating Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution, which guarantee equality before the law and prohibit discrimination.

In Short

• Karnataka HC strikes down 2022 law raising SC/ST reservation beyond 50% limit
• Bench rules increased quotas violate Articles 14 and 15 of Constitution
• Court rejects state's demographic argument for exceeding reservation ceiling

The Karnataka High Court on Monday struck down provisions of a 2022 state law that increased reservation for Scheduled Castes (SCs) from 15 per cent to 17 per cent and for Scheduled Tribes (STs) from 3 per cent to 7 per cent, ruling that the enhanced quotas breached the 50 per cent ceiling on reservations.

A division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice KS Hemalekha held 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 took the aggregate reservation beyond 50 per cent.

"Section 3 of the Act, insofar as it takes the aggregate reservation beyond the ceiling of 50 per cent, is struck down as it violates Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution," the High Court said in its order.

The bench emphasised that any reservation beyond the prescribed limit would violate the constitutional guarantee of equality.

The judgment was delivered in two petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the legislation enacted by the then BJP government led by Basavaraj Bommai. The law increased the overall reservation for SCs, STs and Other Backward Classes (OBCs) from 50 per cent to 56 per cent.

According to Bar and Bench, the High Court rejected the Karnataka government's argument that the state's demographic composition and the inadequate representation of SCs and STs justified exceeding the 50 per cent reservation ceiling.

The state had argued that more than 90 per cent of Karnataka's population belonged to SC, ST and OBC communities and that reservations should reflect their share of the population.

Rejecting the submission, the bench observed, "To accept the said contention would be destructive of the principle of equality enshrined under the Constitution."

The court said the 50 per cent ceiling was intended to maintain a balance between affirmative action and the constitutional guarantee of equality. It held that the state's power to provide reservations remained subject to this limit, irrespective of the numerical strength of backward classes.

The bench also clarified that evidence of inadequate representation of SCs and STs could justify reservations within the constitutional framework but would not automatically permit the state to exceed the overall ceiling.

The government had contended that SCs and STs continued to be inadequately represented, their population had increased substantially over the years, and the existing reservation framework did not adequately reflect demographic changes. It also argued that reports had highlighted the marginalisation of several communities and the need to ensure adequate representation in public employment.

However, the court distinguished between evidence supporting affirmative action and evidence establishing extraordinary circumstances that could justify a departure from the 50 per cent ceiling.

It observed that the reports could support measures to ensure that reservation benefits reached marginalised communities, including through internal reservation, but did not independently establish a legal basis for exceeding the overall limit.

The bench further held that the exception for extraordinary circumstances could not be invoked merely because certain communities were inadequately represented or their population had increased. The collection of quantifiable data on backwardness and inadequate representation, it added, did not by itself permit the state to breach the ceiling.

The High Court also examined whether the Karnataka government had complied with its constitutional obligation to consult the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes before taking a major policy decision affecting the communities.

SIDDARAMAIAH CALLS VERDICT A SERIOUS SETBACK

Reacting to the judgment, former Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah described it as a serious setback to the aspirations of historically marginalised communities and questioned the BJP government's handling of the enhanced reservation policy.

In a statement posted on X, Siddaramaiah said his government respected the judiciary but argued that the judgment raised fundamental questions about the BJP's approach to social justice.

He pointed out that the BJP government had increased SC reservation from 15 per cent to 17 per cent and ST reservation from 3 per cent to 7 per cent ahead of the 2023 Assembly elections, despite the overall quota exceeding the 50 per cent ceiling.

"Why did the BJP announce enhanced reservation without first ensuring its constitutional sustainability? Was electoral advantage prioritised over lasting social justice?" he asked.

Siddaramaiah said the Justice Nagamohan Das Committee, constituted during the Congress government's tenure, had provided the foundation for increasing reservations. He added that the demand for enhanced quotas had emerged from decades of struggle by marginalised communities rather than the political generosity of any party.

"Reservation is not charity. It is a constitutional instrument for correcting historical injustice and securing representation," he said.

The former Chief Minister also criticised the BJP-led Union government for deferring Karnataka's request to include the enhanced reservation provisions in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution, citing the pending litigation.

He urged the Union government to review the 50 per cent ceiling, facilitate a constitutionally sustainable reservation framework informed by population data, and reconsider Karnataka's proposal for inclusion in the Ninth Schedule.

Siddaramaiah also called on the Karnataka government to pursue appropriate legal remedies to safeguard the enhanced reservation and protect affected students and job aspirants.

- Ends