ADVERTISEMENT

Bhim Army Chief Chandra Shekhar Aazad Seeks Review Of Supreme Court Order On Reservation In Job Promotions

Bhim Army Chief Chandra Shekhar Aazad has said in his petition that the court’s Feb. 7 verdict dilutes constitutional provisions.

Members of the media assemble outside the Supreme Court in New Delhi. (Photographer: T. Narayan/Bloomberg)
Members of the media assemble outside the Supreme Court in New Delhi. (Photographer: T. Narayan/Bloomberg)

Bhim Army Chief Chandra Shekhar Aazad has approached the Supreme Court seeking review of the top court’s Feb. 7 verdict which held that states aren’t bound to provide reservations to promotions in government jobs.

Aazad has argued that the judgment—which held that reservation in public employment isn’t a fundamental right—is contrary to the settled law on the issue. The judgment, Aazad said, dilutes constitutional provisions and contradicts two earlier judgments delivered by the Constitution bench of the top court.

An apex court bench comprising Justice L Nageswara Rao and Justice Hemant Gupta had, on Feb. 7, declined to direct the Uttarakhand Government to provide reservations for promotions in public employment to members of the SC/ST community. The bench had also ruled that reservation isn’t a fundamental right and states can’t be directed to provide reservation in promotions. This led to an uproar in the Parliament, with members of various political parties demanding a discussion on the issue in the Lok Sabha.

Opinion
Supreme Court Order On Reservation: Government Says It Was Not Party In Court

With this ruling, according to the review petition, the top court has given a free hand to completely abolish reservation—going against the protection granted by the Indian Constitution. It also violates Article 16, which mandates equality of opportunity to all citizens, the petition said.

The top court had also ruled on Feb. 7 that states aren’t bound to collect data on representation of the SC/ST community members if any state government decides to not extend reservation. To this, the petition said: “The finding that the State Government isn’t required to consider data regarding inadequate representation is against the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in M Nagraj, wherein it has been held that discretion of the State in this regard, is not absolute...’’

The date for hearing the review petition isn’t known yet.

Opinion
Government Failed To Defend Reservation System: Opposition Parties