Editor's Pick: The national implications of the Maratha quota verdict

The Supreme Court has ruled that the Maharashtra law that gives reservation benefits to the Maratha community in the State is unconstitutional as it takes the quantum of reservation above 50%. The court also struck down the findings of the Justice Gaikwad commission that formed the basis of the 2018 law, and also set aside the 2019 Bombay High Court ruling that brought down the 16% reservation mandated by the law to 12 % but upheld its validity. The verdict is bound to have an impact on other States as the court has invited them to make their stand on the issue of quotas existing at 50%. The ceiling on the quantum of reservations in jobs and education was set by the Indira Sawhney judgment of 1992, with exceptions allowed only in "extraordinary circumstances." This ceiling has been breached since then by several States, including Maharashtra; Tamil Nadu, which has quotas amounting to about 69%; and Kerala, which recently introduced a quota for the Economically Backward Classes. There is bound to be a legal and political churn if these quotas have to be defended in court and "extraordinary circumstances" proven. Another part of the ruling that has larger, national implications is that the Centre alone can identify socially and educationally backward classes, and that States can only recommend inclusions or exclusions from the Central List. The judgement upheld the Constitution (One Hundred Second Amendment) Act of 2018, which makes the Centre the final authority on deciding on reservations. The Maratha reservation, which benefits nearly 85 % of the population in Maharashtra, has been a demand since the 1980s but got amplified once the agrarian crisis took hold in the State. The withdrawal of a benefit that has been a political goal as well as a popular demand is bound to have implications in the State. This, along with the larger national implications, are what make this story important. Today's Editorials Against excess: On Maratha quota Sudden death: On IPL 2021 Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Head over to our newsletter subscription page to sign up for Editor's Pick and more. Click here Try out The Hindu's daily news quiz Former bureaucrat Jagmohan Malhotra, who passed away earlier this month served as the Lieutenant Governor of which State/UT twice? 1. Jammu and Kashmir 2. Delhi 3. Daman and Diu 4. Punjab To find out the answer and play the full quiz, click here [logo] Editor's Pick 06 MAY 2021 [The Hindu logo] In the Editor's Pick newsletter, The Hindu explains why a story was important enough to be carried on the front page of today's edition of our newspaper. [Arrow]( [Open in browser]( [Mail icon]( [More newsletters]( The national implications of the Maratha quota verdict [The national implications of the Maratha quota verdict] The Supreme Court has ruled that the Maharashtra law that gives reservation benefits to the [Maratha community in the State is unconstitutional]( as it takes the quantum of reservation above 50%. The court also struck down the findings of the[Justice Gaikwad commission]( that formed the basis of the 2018 law, and also set aside the 2019 Bombay High Court ruling that [brought down the 16% reservation]( mandated by the law to 12 % but upheld its validity. [The verdict]( is bound to have an impact on other States as the court has invited them to make their stand on the issue of quotas existing at 50%. The ceiling on the quantum of reservations in jobs and education was set by the Indira Sawhney judgment of 1992, with exceptions allowed only in "extraordinary circumstances." This ceiling has been breached since then by several States, including Maharashtra; Tamil Nadu, which has quotas amounting to about 69%; and Kerala, which recently introduced a quota for the[Economically Backward Classes](. There is bound to be a legal and political churn if these quotas have to be defended in court and "extraordinary circumstances" proven. Another part of the ruling that has larger, national implications is that the [Centre alone can identify socially and educationally backward classes]( and that States can only recommend inclusions or exclusions from the Central List. The judgement upheld the Constitution (One Hundred Second Amendment) Act of 2018, which makes the Centre the final authority on deciding on reservations. [The Maratha reservation]( which benefits nearly 85 % of the population in Maharashtra, has been a demand since the 1980s but got amplified once the agrarian crisis took hold in the State. The withdrawal of a benefit that has been a political goal as well as a popular demand is bound to have implications in the State. This, along with the larger national implications, are what make this story important.   [underlineimg]  Today's Editorials [Arrow] [Against excess: On Maratha quota]( [Arrow] [Sudden death: On IPL 2021]( [underlineimg] Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Head over to our newsletter subscription page to sign up for Editor's Pick and more. [Click here]( [underlineimg]  Try out The Hindu's daily news quiz Former bureaucrat Jagmohan Malhotra, who passed away earlier this month served as the Lieutenant Governor of which State/UT twice? 1. Jammu and Kashmir 2. Delhi 3. Daman and Diu 4. Punjab  To find out the answer and play the full quiz, [click here]( Today's Best Reads [[Coronavirus | Average monthly income for workers fell by 17%] Coronavirus | Average monthly income for workers fell by 17%]( [[West Bengal Assembly Elections | Longest elections did not help BJP] West Bengal Assembly Elections | Longest elections did not help BJP]( [[New dawn in Dravidian politics] New dawn in Dravidian politics]( [[Coronavirus | Third wave inevitable, says Principal Scientific Adviser] Coronavirus | Third wave inevitable, says Principal Scientific Adviser]( Copyright @ 2021, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. If you are facing any trouble in viewing this newsletter, please [try here]( If you do not wish to receive such emails [go here](