SC opens up staff jobs for OBC and SC/ST blocs, 'omits' EWS
NEW DELHI: CJI B R Gavai, second from the Dalit community to head the judiciary, has amended the Supreme Court Officers and Servant (Conditions of Service and Conduct) Rules, 1961, to provide for reservations to SCs, STs, OBCs, physically challenged, ex-servicemen and dependents of freedom fighters in direct recruitments to subordinate staff of the apex court.
Rule 4A of the Act, amended and substituted on the CJI's instructions, has been gazetted through a notification issued on July 3. However, it omits reservation for candidates belonging to the economically weaker section (EWS), which was introduced by Parliament through Constitution (103rd Amendment) Act, 2019.
The substituted Section 4A, as gazetted, reads: "Reservation in direct recruitment to various categories of posts specified in the Schedule, for the candidates belonging to SCs, STs, OBCs, Physically Challenged, Ex-servicemen and dependant of Freedom Fighters shall be in accordance with the Rules, orders, and Notifications issued from time to time by the Government of India in respect of posts carrying the pay scale corresponding to the pay scale prescribed for the post specified in the Schedule, subject to such modification, variation or exception as the Chief Justice may, from time to time, specify.
"
The 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act introduced Articles 15(6) and 16(6) to give effect to 10% reservation for EWS in govt jobs and admissions to govt and govt-aided educational institutions. It received Presidential assent on Jan 12, 2019. The constitutional validity of EWS quota was challenged in Supreme Court by more than 20 petitions, mainly on the ground that it exceeded the 50% ceiling on quota imposed by SC in its Indra Sawhney judgment in 1992.
A five-judge bench led by then CJI U U Lalit on Nov 7, 2022, by three to two majority, declared that Parliament's decision to provide quota for EWS category was constitutionally valid. The majority view was shared by Justices Dinesh Maheswari, Bela M Trivedi and J B Pardiwala, while Justices Lalit and S R Bhat ruled that EWS quota was illegal.
On Dec 6, 2022, NGO 'Society for the Rights of Backward Communities' filed a petition seeking review of the Nov 7 judgment. A five-judge bench led by then CJI D Y Chandrachud on May 9, 2023 dismissed the review petition, thus giving judicial impregnability to the validity of the EWS quota.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
16 minutes ago
- First Post
History Today: When London was rocked by its worst terror attack since World War II
On the morning of July 7, 2005, a series of explosions struck London during rush hour. Bombs detonated in three crowded London Underground trains and on a city bus. The suicide attacks killed 56 people, including the bombers, and injured around 700 others. It was the deadliest terror attack in Britain since World War II. The bombings happened while world leaders, including British Prime Minister Tony Blair, were attending the G8 summit in Scotland read more On July 7, 2005, London faced its worst attack since World War II when bombs went off at three Underground stations and on a double-decker bus. The suicide bombings killed 56 people, including the bombers, and around 700 others were injured. Also on this day in 1981, US President Ronald Reagan announced he was putting forward Arizona Judge Sandra Day O'Connor's name to become the first female justice to serve on the US Supreme Court. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD As part of Firstpost Explainers' History Today series, here's a look at what happened on July 7: 2005 London bombings On the morning of July 7, 2005, London was hit by a series of explosions during rush hour. Bombs went off in three busy Underground trains and on a city bus. The suicide attacks, believed at the time to be linked to al-Qaeda, killed 56 people, including the bombers, and left about 700 injured. This was the deadliest attack on Britain since World War II. No alert was issued before the blasts. The train bombs went off on the London Underground around 8:50 am, in three different locations. The London Underground train which was involved in an explosion at Aldgate Underground station. Reuters/File Photo About an hour later, a double-decker bus near Tavistock Square on Upper Woburn Place was also targeted. The blast tore the roof off the bus. The bombings took place while world leaders, including British Prime Minister Tony Blair, were gathered at the G8 summit in Scotland. Speaking shortly after the news broke, Blair described the attacks as barbaric and said the timing, during the summit, was likely deliberate. Of the four bombers, three were born in Britain and one in Jamaica. On September 1, 2005, al-Qaeda officially claimed responsibility in a video aired on the Al-Jazeera network. Just two weeks later, on July 21, another four men tried to carry out a second set of attacks on the city's transport system. But these bombs did not go off as planned. The suspects were arrested by the end of the month. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Sandra Day nominated to US Supreme Court On this day in 1981, US President Ronald Reagan declared that he would nominate Arizona Judge Sandra Day O'Connor to the Supreme Court, making her the first woman ever to be chosen for the role. During his 1980 campaign, Reagan had vowed to nominate a woman to the top court as soon as the chance arose. He picked O'Connor from a list of around two dozen male and female candidates as his first Supreme Court nominee. The US Senate later unanimously approved her appointment on September 21. She was sworn in by Chief Justice Warren Burger on September 25. US President Reagan presents his Supreme Court nominee Sandra Day O'Connor in the Rose Garden of the White House. AP/File Photo Sandra Day earned her law degree in just two years and graduated near the top of her class. She went on to marry John Jay O'Connor III, a fellow student. Despite her academic success, she faced rejection from law firms because she was a woman. She then entered public service and got a job as deputy county attorney in San Mateo, California. In 1953, her husband was drafted into the US Army and posted to West Germany as a military judge. Sandra worked there as a civilian lawyer for the army. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD She became Arizona's assistant attorney general in 1965 and was appointed to a vacant seat in the state senate in 1969. After winning elections, she became the first woman in the country to serve as majority leader of a state senate. This Day, That Year 1797: For the first time in US history, the House of Representatives used its power to impeach and voted to charge Senator William Blount of Tennessee. 1898: The United States annexed Hawaii, which later became a territory in 1900 and a state in 1959. 1981: Former India captain and legendary wicketkeeper-batter Mahendra Singh Dhoni was born. 2013: Andy Murray ended a 77-year wait for a British men's singles champion at Wimbledon by beating Novak Djokovic in the final. 2021: Haitian President Jovenel Moise was assassinated, and his wife was injured in a late-night attack at their home.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Why are Bihar's electoral rolls being revised?
The story so far: The Election Commission of India (EC) has initiated a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Bihar before the general elections for its Legislative Assembly. What is an electoral roll? Article 324 of the Constitution provides that the superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of electoral rolls for the conduct of elections to Parliament and State legislature shall vest with the EC. Article 326 provides that every citizen who is not less than 18 years of age shall be entitled to be registered as a voter (elector). The electoral rolls are prepared by the EC as per the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 (RP Act). Section 16 of the RP Act disqualifies a non-citizen from being enrolled in the electoral roll. Section 19 requires that the person is not less than 18 years of age on the qualifying date and is ordinarily resident in the constituency. Section 20 of the RP Act provides the meaning of the term 'ordinarily resident'. It specifies that a person shall not be deemed to be 'ordinarily resident' in a constituency simply because he/she owns or possesses a dwelling house in such constituency. However, at the same time, a person 'temporarily absent' from his/her place of residence shall continue to be 'ordinarily resident' therein. Why has an SIR been initiated? Section 21 of the RP Act deals with the preparation and revision of electoral rolls. It authorises the EC to carry out a special revision of the electoral roll at any time for reasons to be recorded. The Election Commission has noted that there have been large scale additions and deletions to the electoral rolls over the last 20 years due to rapid urbanisation and migration. This has increased the possibility of duplicate entries in the roll. The Commission is constitutionally obligated to ensure that only citizens are enrolled in the electoral rolls. Accordingly, the EC has decided to carry out an SIR for the entire country, starting with Bihar. The last such SIR was carried out for Bihar in the year 2003. Since the Bihar Assembly elections are due in November, the EC has presently laid down the guidelines for an SIR of the Bihar electoral roll with the qualifying date as July 1, 2025. During the last SIR, enumerators were sent for house-to-house verification with a copy of the details of the existing voters. However, in the present SIR, every elector will have to submit an enumeration form to their respective Booth Level Officers (BLOs). For electors registered in the electoral roll as of January 2003 (on the basis of the last SIR), no further documents are required to be submitted except the extract of the 2003 electoral roll. However, electors registered after January 2003, have to additionally submit documents for establishing the date and place of birth for themselves and their parent(s) as required. The schedule for the current SIR is provided in Table 1. What are the pros and cons? There have been arguments for and against the SIR made by various stakeholders. The key issues of contention are summarised below. The process and time required for the entire exercise: Proponents in support of the SIR in its present form argue that the SIR in 2003 was carried out in 31 days without technological support. This time also the same amount of time will be taken for the exercise with technology. Moreover, there are more than one lakh BLOs, nearly 4 lakh volunteers and more than 1.5 lakh Booth Level Agents (BLAs), appointed by political parties, to ensure the smooth implementation of this exercise. Counter arguments against the SIR in its present form state that it is a humungous task which involves the submission of forms by all eight crore voters that has never been done before. Furthermore, close to three crore voters would be required to submit documents establishing their date and place of birth for themselves and their parents. Migrant labourers and students may not be able to submit their enumeration forms within the deadline. Despite the presence of so many field level workers, there can be potential errors in inclusion and exclusion. The exclusion of Aadhaar as a document for registration: Proponents of the SIR in its present form say that the Aadhaar is neither a proof of date of birth nor of citizenship. The Aadhaar card itself carries a disclaimer stating that it can't be used as proof of citizenship. Hence, in line with constitutional and legal requirements, the Aadhaar has been excluded as a valid document. The list of valid documents include caste certificates, family registers and land allotment certificates. Proponents against the SIR in its present form argue that the Aadhaar has become an omnibus identity card for all sections of society, especially the under privileged who may not possess any other document. Form 6 for the inclusion of new voters as per the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 (RER) requires that Aadhaar be provided compulsorily unless the person doesn't have one. It is mentioned as a proof of date of birth and place of residence as per Form 6. These rules were made by the Central government as per the RP Act. It is only in the SIR guidelines that the EC has added a declaration form to be submitted along with Form 6, with additional documents other than Aadhaar for the purposes of establishing date and place of birth. Exclusion of migrants from the electoral roll: Arguments for the SIR in its present form state that the RP Act provides that only citizens who are 'ordinarily resident' should be included in the electoral roll of a constituency. Migrants who have moved away for long periods of time on account of education or employment would be included in the electoral roll of the constituency of their current residence as per provisions of the RP Act and the RER. However, counter arguments posit that the RP Act provides that 'persons temporarily absent' do not cease to be 'ordinarily resident'. Many migrant workers shift to other places within the State or outside the State but return at regular intervals to their place of birth/ upbringing. The families and properties of such migrants may continue in the same location where they would want to retain their right to vote. The EC, as recently as January 2023, had indicated its intention of providing a remote voting facility for such migrant workers subject to technical feasibility and acceptance by all stakeholders. What can be the way forward? To provide an analogy, the inclusion of an ineligible name in the electoral roll is like a guilty person going scot-free, while the exclusion of an eligible voter is akin to one innocent person suffering. Both these prospects would be a blight on democracy. Therefore, electoral rolls should be thoroughly checked and verified. First, the proposed timelines for the completion of such a mammoth exercise are stretched. The EC should ensure that adequate safeguards are put in place for the completion of the exercise without errors. The BLAs should actively participate to prevent errors of omission or addition. Secondly, the exclusion of Aadhaar from the list of valid documents can create issues for many, especially the underprivileged. After considering the ground realities during the first phase of the enumeration, the EC should adequately tailor the process, during the claims and objections phase, to ensure that no eligible citizen is excluded due to their inability to produce any document from the list of valid documents. Finally, migrant workers should not be removed from the rolls as that can result in significant deletions. Many such migrants have exercised their right to vote in the place of their birth/upbringing as per their choice and should continue to do so. It is pertinent to note that as per the amendment of the RP Act in 2010, non-resident Indians who have shifted out of India, even for the long term on account of employment, education or otherwise, are entitled to register and vote in the constituency in which their address as per passport is located. The issue of duplicate voter IDs for the same person in different constituencies should be addressed through Aadhaar seeding for which the EC had begun its consultative process in March 2025. Rangarajan. R is a former IAS officer and author of 'Courseware on Polity Simplified'. He currently trains at Officers IAS Academy. Views expressed are personal.
New Indian Express
an hour ago
- New Indian Express
91 per cent of TN cops think ‘custodial torture' is sometimes necessary: Report
The report, which threw light on the influence of public perception, said 37% of TN cops felt public pressure to a 'great extent' in treating suspected criminals with a 'heavy hand'. Moreover, 46% justified mobs punishing suspects in cases of sexual harassment or kidnapping of children 'to a great extent'. The survey showed that there wasn't a wide difference between the constabulary or IPS officers in the attitude towards extra-judicial measures, while those in the upper subordinate ranks showed relatively lesser inclination. In fact, IPS officers showed highest propensity to justify torture (34%), followed by the constabulary (32%). Only 35% in TN responded 'always' to the question on the likelihood of all arrest procedures being properly followed. Another 50% said 'sometimes' and 15% said 'rarely or never'. The survey, which also tried to capture institutional bias, showed that 44% of TN police felt Dalits are naturally prone to 'great or some extent' to commit crimes. Anoop Jaiswal, former DGP from TN, told TNIE that in India 'police interrogation' invariably meant 'roughing up' a suspect, which is not just illegal but criminal. Highlighting that the urgency to close cases swiftly by making suspects confess or recover stolen property was the key reason for custodial violence, Jaiswal said, 'Police should not commit bigger crimes to solve smaller crimes.' He stressed that officers at all levels, and not just in subordinate ranks, should undergo sensitisation programmes. Meeran Chadha Borwankar, former DGP from Maharashtra, who served as DG of Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPRD), responding to a set of findings shared with her by TNIE, raised doubts about the survey methodology as certain findings like TN police being more prone to adopting 'any means' to solve a case and IPS officers showing high propensity to justify torture did not seem correct. However, on the need for reforms, she said the basic and in-service training must have high emphasis on Constitution and human rights. She added that prompt action against deviant behaviour showed good results. While underlining that a well-resourced, trained and prompt criminal justice system will not have such violations, encounter killings in particular, she asked, 'The pertinent question is – are we ready to invest in it?'
