http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20070329&fname=quota&sid=1&\ pn=1 <http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20070329&fname=quota&sid=1\ &pn=1>
RESERVATIONS 'Don't Divide The Country' The Supreme Court stays implementation of the 27% OBC quota policy and asks the government not to divide the country because of its "vote bank" and to "determine who are the socially and economically backward". [...] <http://www.outlookindia.com/dossiersind.asp?id=351> In a severe setback to UPA government and the pro-reservation lobby, the Supreme Court (SC) has stayed the controversial provision in the Central Educational Institution (Reservation in Admission) Act of 2006 <http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20060823&fname=pratap%5Fma\ nifesto&sid=1> enabling 27 per cent quota for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in all government aided higher educational institutions, including elite central educational institutions like IITs, AIIMS and IIMs. The SC Bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat and L S Panta today ruled on the batch of petitions filed by various organisations and individuals challenging the 2006 Act as being ultra vires the constitution. These organisations had further challenged the centre's decision to implement the quota, claiming that there was no relevant data on the number of OBCs in the country. The Bench ruled, "We are of the view that the impugned notification and enforcing the reservation for OBCs in the educational institutions must be put on hold as the government has failed to provide any authentic or reliable data to justify its policy of reservation. What may have been relevant in 1931 census may have some relevance but cannot be the determinative factor. Vote Bank Politics The lawyer for United Student's Forum, one of the petitioners against the Act, M L Lahoty, said that the Bench had reprimanded the centre by saying: "Don't divide the country only because of your vote bank ...the consequences of this quota would be very bad'." "Reservation cannot be permanent and appears to perpetuate backwardness," the Bench observed, pointing out that the centre should stay away from dividing the society on caste basis and should behave in a more responsible way, and that the government's decision to implement the quota system was full of flaws. Today's order effectively puts into jeopardy government's plan to implement the new quota regime in the elite institutions and central universities from the coming academic year; coming as it does just before the UP elections, the political cost of the Supreme Court justice is immediate. The judgement has therefore predictably come under immediate attack from pro-reservation parties who have called it "retrograde, uncalled for and unfortunate" while those opposed to the Act are understandably relieved. HRD Minister Arjun Singh, the so-called brain behind the law, meanwhile maintains that Parliament will stick to the provision. Who Are The Backwards? The centre had maintained that in the absence of data after 1931, there was no alternative but to project population proportion of socially and educationally backward classes and OBCs from the only source available. Holding that the government failed to explain as to why a firm data base could not be evolved first, the Bench kept on hold the operation of the relevant provision of the Act dealing with reservation for the OBCs. Disposing off the petitions against the Act passed in December last year, the court said it will examine on merits the constitutional validity of the Act in the third week of August. However, it allowed the government to initiate the process for determining on a broad-based foundation as to what constitutes "Other Backward Classes". [Next] <http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20070329&fname=quota&sid=1\ &pn=2> [2] <http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20070329&fname=quota&sid=1\ &pn=2> [3] <http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20070329&fname=quota&sid=1\ &pn=3> (1 of 3)
