38.6c New Delhi, India, Monday, January 12, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Reservations In Promotions For SC/ST: No Need To Collect Quantifiable Data Of Backwardness Says SC. [Read Judgment]

By LawStreet News Network      26 September, 2018 12:00 AM      0 Comments
Reservations In Promotions For SC/ST: No Need To Collect Quantifiable Data Of Backwardness Says SC. [Read Judgment]

The Supreme Court today (September 26th, 2018) held that the 2006 judgment in M Nagaraj v. Union of India that deals with reservations in promotion for the SC/ST community need not be referred to a seven-judge Constitution Bench.

The five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra and comprising of Justices Kurian Joseph, R F Nariman, S K Kaul, and Indu Malhotra also held that the states need not collect quantifiable data on backwardness of SC/ST for giving quota in job promotion to SC/ST employees.

The courts verdict came on petitions filed by the Centre and various state governments questioning the 2006 judgment in the M Nagaraj case in which it was held that government cannot introduce quota in promotion for SC/ST persons in public employment unless they prove that the particular Dalit community is backward, is inadequately represented and such a reservation in promotion would not affect the overall efficiency of public administration.

The Centre has alleged that the 2006 verdict had put unnecessary conditions in granting quota benefits to SC/ST employees and sought the reconsideration of the verdict by a larger Bench.

For the Centre, Attorney General K K Venugopal, arguing in favour of granting quota to SC/ST had said that the SC/ST communities have been facing caste-based discrimination for long and the stigma of caste is attached to them despite the fact that some of them have come up.

Earlier, on August 30, 2018, the Bench had reserved its verdict after hearing various stakeholders, including the Centre, on the matter.



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

wrong-bail-orders-alone-without-evidence-of-corruption-cannot-justify-removal-of-judicial-officer-sc
Trending Judiciary
Wrong Bail Orders Alone, Without Evidence of Corruption, Cannot Justify Removal of Judicial Officer: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules that wrong bail orders alone cannot justify removal of a judicial officer without proof of corruption, misconduct, or extraneous considerations.

06 January, 2026 07:43 PM
divorced-muslim-woman-can-seek-maintenance-under-crpc-even-after-receiving-amount-under-muslim-women-protection-act-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Divorced Muslim Woman Can Seek Maintenance Under CrPC Even After Receiving Amount Under Muslim Women Protection Act: Kerala HC [Read Order]

Kerala High Court holds that a divorced Muslim woman can claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC even after receiving amounts under the 1986 Act.

06 January, 2026 08:19 PM
delhi-hc-full-bench-settles-bsf-seniority-dispute-rule-of-continuous-regular-appointment-prevails
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Full Bench Settles BSF Seniority Dispute; Rule of ‘Continuous Regular Appointment’ Prevails [Read Judgment]

Delhi High Court Full Bench rules BSF seniority is based on date of continuous regular appointment, rejecting claims for antedated seniority due to delayed joining.

06 January, 2026 08:45 PM
borrowers-cannot-invoke-writ-jurisdiction-to-compel-banks-to-extend-one-time-settlement-benefits-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Borrowers Cannot Invoke Writ Jurisdiction to Compel Banks to Extend One-Time Settlement Benefits: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

Kerala High Court holds borrowers cannot invoke writ jurisdiction to compel banks to grant One-Time Settlement benefits, as OTS is not a legal right.

07 January, 2026 09:22 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email