The Bombay High Court on Thursday directed the Maharashtra government to explain its decision to cancel a five per cent reservation for the Muslim community in education and government jobs. A division bench comprising Justices R. I. Chagla and Advait Sethna has granted the state three weeks to file an affidavit in response to a petition challenging the move.
The legal challenge follows a Government Resolution (GR) issued on February 17 by the Department of Social Justice and Special Aid. This resolution effectively nullified all previous orders and ordinances that had granted the five per cent quota to socially and educationally backward Muslim groups under the Special Backward Category (A).
The reservation in question dates back to July 2014, when the then Congress-NCP administration announced a 16 per cent quota for the Maratha community and a five per cent quota for Muslims. While the 16 per cent reservation was initially challenged in court, the High Court had previously allowed the five per cent educational quota for Muslims to stand, even as it struck down the reservation in the employment sector.
However, the February 17 GR scrapped these earlier circulars and halted the issuance of caste and non-creamy layer certificates to Muslims under the Special Backward Category, leading to the current legal standoff.
The petition, filed by advocate Syed Ejaz Abbas Naqvi, argues that the government’s decision is unconstitutional and detrimental to the interests of the minority community. The plea specifically labels the scrap as an act of “racial discrimination,” asserting that there is no rational basis for withdrawing the benefits.
“The respondent (Maharashtra government) is practicing racial discrimination with the persons of a minority community i.e. the Muslim community,” the plea stated. “This is in violation of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution.”
The petitioner further contends that by stopping the issuance of necessary certificates, the state has effectively blocked access to opportunities previously secured through judicial and executive oversight.
The High Court has now placed the onus on the state government to justify the rationale behind the February 17 resolution. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on May 4, following the submission of the state’s affidavit.
