7 months ago
2
Failure to framework a lawful policy, successful accordance with the Supreme Court judgments, has pushed the contented of 42% Backward Classes (BC) reservations successful Telangana agrarian section bodies to a concern wherever the State authorities has nary different enactment but to commencement from scratch the workout to supply the enhanced reservations to BCs, according to Vakulabharanam Krishna Mohan Rao, former Chairman of the Telangana State Backward Classes Commission.
“When a State seeks to transverse the 50% ceiling, the minimum request is that commissions should beryllium quasi-judicial successful nature, autarkic successful operation, and vested with civilian tribunal powers.” So, unless the existent argumentation — afloat of ineligible flaws — is addressed from the archetypal step, determination is nary mode the desired effect tin beryllium achieved.
Mr. Rao said that each 3 stages of arriving astatine 42% reservations lagged the legality and statutory powers, from the Social, Educational, Employment, Economic, Political, Caste (SEEEPC) Survey, to the constitution of the Dedicated Commission headed by Busani Venkateshwar Rao and yet the Justice Sudershan Reddy Committee.
Recalling the Constitutional framework, helium said the Supreme Court successful Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) ruled that reservations indispensable remainder connected contemporaneous empirical information and cannot transcend the 50% ceiling, barring proven bonzer circumstances.
In K. Krishna Murthy v. Union of India (2010), the Court prescribed the ‘Triple Test’ for section assemblage reservations, which see a dedicated autarkic committee indispensable behaviour an empirical survey, quantifiable information indispensable found inadequate practice and the wide quota indispensable not breach the 50% ceiling. It was reaffirmed successful the Vikas Kishanrao Gawali v. State of Maharashtra (2021) case.
Mr. Rao says Telangana did not conscionable these law benchmarks. The SEEEPC Survey conducted by the Planning Department, was not nether a statutory commission. The Busani Venkateshwar Rao Commission was a single-member committee headed by a retired IAS officer, with nary statutory ground nether Article 340 and without multi-expert participation.
Similarly, the Justice Sudarshan Reddy Committee, contempt the eminence of its members, was lone an advisory assemblage without the statutory mandate. Neither of the bodies assemblage undertook household-level socio-economic tract surveys nor statewide nationalist hearings, helium said.
