DR. JAISHRI LAXMANRAO PATIL Vs. THE CHIEF MINISTER AND ANOTHER
LAWS(SC)-2020-9-17
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on September 09,2020

Dr. Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil Appellant
VERSUS
The Chief Minister And Another Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

M.R. BALAJI VS. STATE OF MYSORE [REFERRED TO]
H.P. S.T. EMPLOYEES FEDERATION VS. H.P. SAMANAYA VARG KARAMCHARI KALAYAN [REFERRED TO]
B.K. PAVITRA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
JANHIT ABHIYAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. DAVINDER SINGH [REFERRED TO]
TAMIL NADU MEDICAL OFFICERS ASSOCIATION VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL RAHIM ISMAIL C RAHIMTOOLA VS. STATE OF BOMBAY [REFERRED TO]
INDRA SAWHNEY VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
BHAVESH D PARISH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
P A INAMDAR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
MODERN DENTAL COLLEGE and RESEARCH INSTITUTE VS. STATE OF M P [REFERRED TO]
E V CHINNAIAH VS. STATE OF A P [REFERRED TO]
M NAGARAJ VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
NAIR SERVICE SOCIETY VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
ASHOKA KUMAR THAKUR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. HIRENDRA PAL SINGH [REFERRED TO]
SURAJ BHAN MEENA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
U P POWER CORPORATION LTD VS. RAJESH KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
S V JOSHI VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
HEALTH FOR MILLIONS VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
RAM SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
K.S. PUTTASWAMY (RETD.) AND ORS. VS. UNION OF INDIA (UOI) AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
S. PANNEER SELVAM AND ORS. VS. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
SURESH CHAND GAUTAM VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SUPREME COURT ADVOCATES VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF TRIPURA & ORS. VS. JAYANTA CHAKRABORTY & ORS. [REFERRED TO]
SHRIMANTH BALASAHEB PATIL VS. HONORABLE SPEAKER, KARNATAKA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

GAURAV GANESH DAS DAGA VS. MAHARASHTRA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION [LAWS(BOM)-2022-3-50] [REFERRED TO]
CHITRAKANT CHOUBEY VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2022-2-43] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Leave granted.
The Maharashtra State Reservation (of Seats for admission in Educational Institutions in the State and for appointments in the Public Services and posts under the State) for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") which came into force on 30.11.2018, declared Marathas tobe a "Socially and Educationally Backward Class". Reservations to the extent of 16 per cent of the total seats in educational institutions including private educational institutions and 16 per cent of the total appointments in direct recruitment for public services and posts under the State, were separately made for "socially and educationally backward classes" according to Section 4 of the Act. The constitutional validity of the Act was challenged by filing Public Interest Litigations in the High Court of Bombay. The High Court of Bombay upheld the constitutionality of the Act. However, the High Court reduced the quantum of reservations provided therein from 16 per cent to 12 per cent in respect of the educational institutions and from 16 per cent to 13 per cent in respect of public employment.

(2.)Unsuccessful, the Appellants assailed the correctness of the judgment of the High Court by filing the above Appeals. By an order dated 12.07.2019, notice was issued in the SLPs giving rise to these Appeals. It was made clear that any action taken pursuant to the judgment of the High Court shall be subject to the result in the SLPs. In view of the importance of the issue involved in these Appeals, we listed the matter for hearing on 27.07.2020. Though the learned counsel appearing for the Appellants pressed for the hearing to commence, the learned counsel appearing for the Respondents expressed their apprehensions about the feasibility of hearing the Appeals through Virtual Hearing. The concern voiced by them was that a large number of Advocates are appearing and there is voluminous record to be perused, which makes it difficult for hearing through Video Conferencing.
(3.)On 27.07.2020, Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, learned senior counsel appearing for the State of Maharashtra referred to a Government Resolution dated 04.05.2020 to submit that the State Government has taken a decision not to undertake any type of fresh recruitment process except in Public Health Department and Department of Medical Education and Research. Mr. Rohatgi further submitted that the Appeals have to be heard after the commencement of physical Courts and the Appellants cannot have a grievance in view of the decision of the State Government to not make appointments to public services and posts. On the contrary, the Appellants contended that postponement of the hearing of the Appeals would result in loss of seats for the open category candidates in admissions to Educational Institutions for the current academic year.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.