38.6c New Delhi, India, Saturday, July 13, 2024


By LawStreet News Network      05 October, 2021 01:27 PM      0 Comments

Sr. Adv Gopal Sankaranarayanan says he has submitted a table in which seven States have said that they have not undertaken Nagaraj exercise.

Attorney General KK Venugopal starts his submissions.

The entire issue started with Indra Sawhney case of 1992: AG

AG refers to paragraphs of Indra Sawhney which says that wherever reservations in promotions are already provided, it will continue only for period of 5 years from the judgment.

What is relevant is Indra Sawhney concerned with backward classes and not SC/STs: AG

This judgment deals with question of whether every category should be given reservation proportional to their population. It then says 'no it should not be so given' because then it will far exceed 50 percent cap: AG

The judgment says reservation should be such that it does not exceed 50 percent: AG.

Article 16 requires equality in matters of public employment

If merit alone is criteria, then SC/STs who are disadvantaged socially might not be able to compete: AG

AG Venugopal now referring to M Nagaraj judgment.

Refers to para 82 of the judgment which says that RK Sabharwal judgment clarified that judgment in Indra Sawhney will apply only to initial appointments and not promotion

SC/STs have been recognised by Articles 341 and 342 as most backward.

The Court does not however go into how quantfiable data as regards promotions is to be determined: AG

Three requirements under Nagaraj for providing reservation in promotion to SC/ STs are Backwardness, inadequacy of representation and overall efficiency: AG Venugopal.

AG now referring to BK Pavitra II judgment.

AG now adverting to Mukesh Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand, a judgment by Justice L Nageswara Rao who is heading present Bench also.

In it was held inadequacy of representation is a matter of subjective satisfaction of State based on objective criteria: AG.

In that judgment, court said it should show deference to State opinion though judicial scrutiny is not ruled out altogether: AG

Bench rises for lunch.

Share this article:

User Avatar

Leave a feedback about this

Trending Judiciary
Bombay High Court denies interim relief in plea against 1 year Pan Masala Ban [Read Order]

Bombay High Court denies interim relief to petitioners challenging the 1-year ban on pan masala, citing arguable questions and ongoing similar cases.

12 July, 2024 10:00 AM
Trending Judiciary
SC Collegium recommends appointment of Chief Justices of eight High Courts [Read Order]

SC Collegium recommends appointments of Chief Justices for Delhi, Himachal Pradesh, J&K, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Madras, and Meghalaya High Courts.

12 July, 2024 10:55 AM


Trending Judiciary
SC to Hear Various Pleas Challenging NEET-UG Exam Today

The Supreme Court will hear pleas challenging the NEET-UG exam today, with students raising concerns over malpractice and irregularities in the 2024 test.

08 July, 2024 10:23 AM
Trending Judiciary
Courts can't ask accused to share Google PIN location as bail condition: SC

Courts can't mandate sharing Google PIN location as bail condition, protecting privacy rights: Supreme Court. Decision overturns Delhi HC's bail condition requiring Google PIN sharing.

08 July, 2024 12:13 PM
Trending Judiciary
Madhya Pradesh HC quashes FIR in rape case, rules consensual relationship cannot be termed rape [Read Order]

Madhya Pradesh HC quashes FIR in rape case, ruling consensual relationship between adults, even if promise of marriage is broken, cannot be termed rape.

08 July, 2024 12:47 PM
Trending Judiciary
Uttarakhand HC seeks State’s response on arresting minors found dating [Read Order]

Uttarakhand High Court seeks the state's response on arresting minors found dating, suggesting alternatives like counseling and statement recording.

08 July, 2024 01:34 PM


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email