SC order on quota detrimental to SC/ST interest, says Bhim Army chief

Bhim Army chief Chandrashekhar Azad filed a review plea in Supreme Court challenging its recent verdict stating states are not bound to provide reservation in promotion in public employment

Bhim Army chief Chandra Shekhar ‘Azad’ (Photo Courtesy: Social Media)
Bhim Army chief Chandra Shekhar ‘Azad’ (Photo Courtesy: Social Media)
user

IANS

Bhim Army chief Chandrashekhar Azad on Tuesday filed a review plea in the Supreme Court challenging its recent verdict stating states are not bound to provide reservation in promotion in public employment and also quota is not a fundamental right.

Azad said this judgement will act as a tool in the hands of the oppressors to further oppress and exploit the SC, ST, OBC and the economically weaker sections, causing further marginalization within society.

"The impugned judgment has given the states a free hand to completely ignore the criteria of inadequacy of representation of SC, ST in public service", said Azad.

The petition filed through advocate Mehmood Pracha contended this judgement suffers from an error apparent on the face of the record.

"The impugned judgment has not only diluted constitutional provisions and has attempted to interpret provisions of the Constitution in a manner that is contradictory to the law laid down by two Constitution benches of this court, which is against the settled law and against judicial propriety", said the petition.

Azad contended this judgement will eventually defeat the endeavor to bring equality between the citizens by the framers of the Constitution.

Last week, the Supreme Court held that states are not bound to provide reservation in promotion in public employment or to collect quantifiable data in respect of representation of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities in public services.

The petition contended this judgement is not only sweeping in its scope, and laid down principles that are erroneous on the face of the record. "It is severely detrimental to the interests of the SC/ST which as per the judgment of the Constitutional Bench in Indira Sawhney case are the most backward among backward classes", said the petition.

The petition said while accepting that Article 16(4) and 16 (4 A) are enabling provisions, the top court verdict has lost sight of the fact that Article 16 mandates equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the state.

The petitioners have urged the top court to allow the review petition on this judgement. The apex court verdict came while dealing with pleas on the Uttarakhand government's September 5, 2012 decision to fill all posts in public services in the state without providing reservations to SC and ST.

For all the latest India News, Follow India Section.

next