The Maharashtra Assembly on February 20 unanimously passed a Bill granting 10% reservation in education and government jobs to the Maratha community. While introducing the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Bill, 2024, Chief Minister Eknath Shinde said that he had fulfilled his promise to create a “foolproof” Maratha quota within three months.
However, activists such as Manoj Jarange Patil have claimed that the new legislation is a “betrayal” of the community and instead seek a Maratha quota carved out from the existing reservation for the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) category. On the other hand, OBC leaders have raised concerns over the Marathas potentially eating into their share of the reservation pie.
The new legislation is similar to the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Act, 2018 introduced by the previous Devendra Fadnavis-led government, which the Supreme Court struck down in May 2021. This is the third time in the last decade that the State has introduced legislation for a Maratha quota. With the prior two bids failing to pass judicial scrutiny, Opposition parties have alleged that the new Bill was born out of political exigency ahead of the Lok Sabha elections and is likely to suffer a similar fate.
What does the new Bill entail?
The Bill does not disturb the existing OBC quota and is distinct from the Maharashtra government’s earlier notification on the issuance of Kunbi caste certificates to eligible Marathas for inclusion within the OBC category. Thus, non-Kunbi Marathas will continue to be covered under the new law, making the Maratha community eligible for reservations under two separate categories for the first time.
However, those who fall within the “creamy layer” bracket (members of a backward class who are highly advanced socially, economically and educationally) will not be entitled to the benefit.
The law has been formulated based on a report of the Justice (retired) Sunil B Shukre-led Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission that claims to have surveyed 1,58,20,264 families across the State. It opined that “exceptional circumstances and extraordinary situations” justify granting reservation to the community beyond the Supreme Court-approved 50% limit. Concluding that the Marathas constitute 28% of the State’s population, with 84% of them qualifying as not advanced, it pointed out that such a large backward class cannot be added to the existing reserved categories. The percentage of reservation to be granted was, however, left to the State government’s discretion.
The Commission also attributed extreme poverty, decline in agricultural income, and partitions in land holdings as reasons for the declining status of the Marathas. It further outlined that 94% of farmers who have died by suicide in the State belonged to the Maratha community.
Maharashtra already has 52% reservations, split into Scheduled Castes (13%), Scheduled Tribes (7%), OBC (19%), Vimukta Jati (3%), Nomadic Tribe B (2.5%), Nomadic Tribe C (3.5%), Nomadic Tribe D (2%), and Special Backward Classes (2%). The 10% Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) reservation is also applicable to the State — making the total reservation 72% with the inclusion of the new quota.
Narayan Rane committee report
In the first-ever bid to extend reservation to the Marathas, a non-statutory committee headed by veteran leader Narayan Rane in February 2014 submitted a report to the then Prithviraj Chavan-led Congress-NCP Democratic Front government, stipulating that the Marathas constitute 32% of the population in the State and needed economic upliftment in the form of a special quota. Accordingly, the government passed an ordinance reserving 16% of government jobs and seats in educational institutions for Marathas and 5% for Muslims.
Also Read: Strength vs reason: On legislation and reservation to certain social groups
On November 14, 2014, a division bench of then Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice M S Sonak of the Bombay High Court passed an interim order staying the ordinance, pointing out that findings of previous committees such as the Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission headed by Justice (retired) RM Bapat and the National Commission for Backward Classes have shown that the Marathas cannot be regarded as a backward class. It also dismissed the Rane committee report for suffering from “several glaring flaws.” Referring to the apex court’s landmark verdict in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992), the bench underscored that the 50% cap for reservations cannot be breached except “in extraordinary situations and for extraordinary reasons.” In the same year, the Supreme Court refused to stay the interim order.
In 2015, the BJP-Shiv Sena government led by Devendra Fadnavis turned the ordinance into an Act, which was passed by the Assembly. However, a year later, the Bombay High Court stayed the Act for its resemblance to the ordinance.
Gaikwad Commission’s recommendations
Following its failed attempt, the government constituted an 11-member statutory commission — the Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission headed by Justice (retired) N.G. Gaikwad to conduct a survey. In its report submitted on November 15, 2018, the Commission recommended granting Marathas 12% reservation in higher education and 13% reservation in public employment. It found that 76.86% of the Maratha families were engaged in agriculture and agriculture labour, 6% were in government and semi-government services, 3% in private services, 4% in trade and industry, and 9% in non-agricultural physical labour.
Also Read: MSBCC justifies 16% Maratha reservation
Based on this, the government on November 30, 2018, implemented the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2018, which provided the Marathas 16% quota overall in education and government jobs.
Meanwhile, on August 11, 2018, the Parliament passed the 102nd Constitutional (Amendment) Act, 2018, which gave constitutional status to the National Commission for Backward Classes and also introduced Article 324A — a provision empowering the President to notify a “Central List” of Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBCs) in relation to a particular State or Union Territory. Further, the amendment specified that any modification to the central list could only be done by the Parliament.
Bombay High Court’s approval
The Maratha quota guaranteed under the SEBC Act, 2018, was subsequently challenged in the Bombay High Court. The petitioners contended that the newly inserted Article 342A took away States’ powers to identify SEBCs and thus no new communities such as the Marathas could be granted reservation.
In June 2019, a division bench of Justices Ranjit V More and Bharati H Dangre upheld the reservation but ruled that the 16% quota granted by the State was not “justifiable” and accordingly reduced it to 12% in education and 13% in employment, as recommended by the Gaikwad Commission. It also noted that the Commission in its report had set out “exceptional circumstances and extra-ordinary situations” that justified crossing the 50% reservation cap.
‘Dominant forward class’
In May 2021, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil v. Chief Minister, Maharashtra set aside the Bombay High Court ruling and held that there were no “exceptional circumstances” which merits the government breaching the 50% ceiling limit to bestow quota benefits on the Maratha community. Declining to revisit its Indira Sawhney verdict, the Court said that the 50% cap, although an arbitrary determination, is now constitutionally recognised.
Also read | Reinforcing caste hierarchies: on Maratha quota
Dismissing the findings of the Gaikwad Commission, the Court observed that the Marathas are a “dominant forward class and are in the mainstream of national life.” While upholding the constitutional validity of the 102nd Amendment, it stated that the President (that is, the Central government) alone was empowered to identify SEBCs and include them in the Central List for claiming reservation benefits. States could only make suggestions to the President or the relevant statutory commissions for inclusion, exclusion or modification of the List.
In April last year, the top court dismissed the government’s review plea, following which a curative petition was filed, which is still pending adjudication.
In November 2022, the Maharashtra government announced that economically weaker members of the Maratha community could benefit from the 10% EWS quota following the Supreme Court’s verdict upholding such a law. The benefit applies to persons who do not fall within any reserved categories and have an annual family income of less than ₹8 lakh.
Will it pass judicial muster?
According to Alok Prasanna Kumar, co-Founder and Lead at the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy in Bengaluru, the legislation is unlikely to pass judicial scrutiny owing to the top court striking down a similar law in Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil. “The Court refused to recognise the Marathas as a socially and educationally backward class. The criteria for granting such a reservation should be based on data which shows that the community suffers from social backwardness. For instance, were they denied access to education and social facilities?” he highlights.
“To breach the Supreme Court-ordained 50% reservation cap, exceptional circumstances need to be shown, which is absent in this case. Marathas are politically dominant, and have land holdings — by no metric can they be said to be socially and educationally oppressed,” Mr. Kumar adds.
