Bombay HC strikes down GR promotion quotas

In a significant judgment, the Bombay High Court has struck down, by a ratio of 2:1, a Government Resolution issued in 2004 allowing reservation in promotion to government employees, including in local bodies, to persons belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes, Nomadic Tribes, Special Backward Category, as being ultra vires Article 16 (4A) of the Constitution of India.

A division bench of Justice Anoop Mohta and Justice Amjad Sayed, while striking down the resolution, set aside the order of Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT), which had struck down the Maharashtra State Public Services (Reservation) Act, 2001, holding it as unconstitutional.

It said, "The issue of constitutional validity of the Reservation Act is kept open for determination in appropriate case and on an appropriate occasion."

The court also directed the government to take corrective steps in respect of promotions already granted within 12 weeks.

However, the government sought a stay on the order, to appeal in the Supreme court, which was granted and accordingly, the order was stayed for 12 weeks.

The court accordingly disposed off the petition filed by the state government challenging the order passed by MAT in 2014, holding the act and the resolution as invalid.

Petitioner Vijay Ghogre had approached MAT challenging the resolutions, which later moved to the HC. However, as there were conflicting judgment passed by two judges, the matter was referred to a single bench.

Last month, single judge M S Sonak concurred with the view taken by Justice Sayed, striking down the resolutions. Accordingly the matter was placed before the division bench for final pronouncement on Friday.

Earlier, an order by Justice Mohta had reversed the MAT ruling, while Justice A A Sayed had held that the MAT should not have gone into the constitutional validity of the enactment in the facts and circumstances of the case. At the same time, Justice Sayyed had struck down the two GRs holding them unconstitutional.

The court has now held that granting benefit of reservation to a certain category of employees was liable to be struck down as the government was not legally authorised to extend such benefits.