Latest Article

Historic Quota Bill Passed:- Marathas Granted 10% Reservation in Maharashtra

Back

Courtesy/By: PARAM SAKET SARANG | 2024-02-27 16:13 Views : 212

Historic Quota Bill Passed:- Marathas Granted 10% Reservation in Maharashtra

Introduction

A law granting 10% reservation to the Maratha community in government jobs and education was unanimously passed by the Maharashtra parliament.

The Maratha Reservation bill was approved by the Maharashtra State Legislature today in both the Legislative Council and the State Legislative Assembly, guaranteeing the Maratha community a 10% reservation in employment and education. Today, the Maharashtra State Government approved the findings of the Shukre Commission, which was tasked with looking into the Maratha community's perceived lack of progress. The draft report was accepted by the Cabinet during today's meeting in Mumbai. Only members of the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes who do not fall into the creamy layer category would be eligible for reservations under this Act, which will apply the creamy layer concept.

According to the report that Justice (retired) Sunil Shukre, the head of the commission, delivered to the government last week, "exceptional circumstances and extraordinary situations exist" and this justifies providing the Maratha group with a quota that is greater than 50%.

Shinde stated in the Assembly that 22 states had more than 50% reservations. Among them are Haryana (67%), Bihar (75%), and Tamil Nadu (69%).

As of right now, 52% of Maharashtra's reservation is made up of the following groups: Special Backward Classes (2%), Nomadic Tribe B (2.5%), Nomadic Tribe C (3.5%), Nomadic Tribe D (2%), OBC (19%), Vimukt Jati (3%), and SC (13%). In addition, ten per cent is set aside for the EWS group, and ten per cent more is set aside for Marathas, bringing the state's total reservation to seventy-two per cent.

What is the History and Timelines of the Maratha Reservation Demand?

The Marathas are a caste that makes up about 33% of the state's population and includes landowners and peasants among other members.

Although the majority of Marathas speak Marathi, not everyone who speaks Marathi is a member of the Maratha community.

However, many Marathas have experienced social and economic regression throughout time as a result of elements like land fragmentation, agrarian hardship, unemployment, and a lack of educational possibilities. The rural economy still heavily depends on the community. Peshwa Bajirao I oversaw the Maratha Kingdom's expansion into a fully-fledged empire in the eighteenth century.

Timelines of the Maratha Reservation Demand

2017

Retired Justice N G Gaikwad led an 11-member commission that recommended Marathas be granted reservation under the Socially and Educationally Backward Class (SEBC).

2018

A bill requesting a 16% reservation for the Maratha community was passed by the Maharashtra Assembly.

2019

The Bombay High Court noted that the reservation should be lowered from 16% to 12% in school and 13% in employment even though it was upheld.

2020

The Chief Justice of India was tasked with overseeing a larger bench in this case when the Supreme Court of India halted its execution.

2021

The Supreme Court invalidated the Maratha reservation in 2021, citing the 1992 cap of 50% on all reservations.

The total reservation ceiling was raised to 64% and 65%, respectively, by the Maratha reservations of 12% and 13% in employment and education.

"The Supreme Court made it clear in the 1992 Indira Sawhney ruling that the 50% rule would apply unless there were very specific, unusual circumstances that would allow the inhabitants of distant and isolated areas to be brought into the mainstream.

The Supreme Court ruled that the state government of Maharashtra could not have exceeded the limit because there were no "extraordinary circumstances" or "exceptional circumstances" in the state."

Argument in favour of Maratha Reservation

The Shukre Commission's factual research highlights the socio-economic obstacles that the Maratha community faces, supporting the necessity of a reservation to elevate them out of poverty and marginalization.
The alarmingly high rate of farmer suicides among Marathas underscores the depth of their financial hardship and the pressing need for focused initiatives aimed at improving the community.
Because of their backwardness, Marathas have long been shut out of mainstream chances. Their representation and engagement in a variety of sectors can be improved by reservations in government employment and education, which promotes inclusive development.

Argument against the Maratha Reservation

There are concerns about the new Bill's ability to withstand judicial scrutiny given the history of prior Maratha reservation attempts that faced legal challenges and ultimately failed in higher courts, particularly in light of the Supreme Court's previous decision to invalidate Maratha reservations for lacking sufficient empirical data to support quota extension beyond the 50% ceiling.
There was debate over a draft notification that suggested recognizing "sage soyare"—extended cousins of Marathas with Kunbi lineage—as Kunbi people eligible for OBC reservation.
Several Maratha officials and activists voiced their displeasure with the separate reservation, saying they would rather be included in the OBC group.
Reservation might take care of short-term issues, but it might not deal with Maratha's underlying backwardness in a meaningful way. Sustainable development requires a multifaceted strategy that addresses problems with infrastructure, skill development, and education.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Maharashtra State Legislature's unanimous approval of the Maratha Reservation bill is a big step in the right direction toward resolving the Maratha community's perception of a lack of advancement. The Shukre Commission's conclusions were approved, which emphasize the identification of exceptional circumstances that call for giving the Maratha community a 10% quota in employment and education. The administration intends to target those who are actually in need while upholding the creamy layer concept to guarantee fair possibilities for social and scholastic growth by putting this reservation into effect. This choice shows Maharashtra is taking a proactive stance toward social welfare and equality by resolving historical injustices and promoting diversity.

References

Courtesy/By: PARAM SAKET SARANG | 2024-02-27 16:13

News

Latest Article

Historic Quota Bill Passed:- Marathas Granted 10% Reservation in Maharashtra

Back

Historic Quota Bill Passed:- Marathas Granted 10% Reservation in Maharashtra

Introduction

A law granting 10% reservation to the Maratha community in government jobs and education was unanimously passed by the Maharashtra parliament.

According to the report that Justice (retired) Sunil Shukre, the head of the commission, delivered to the government last week, "exceptional circumstances and extraordinary situations exist" and this justifies providing the Maratha group with a quota that is greater than 50%.

Shinde stated in the Assembly that 22 states had more than 50% reservations. Among them are Haryana (67%), Bihar (75%), and Tamil Nadu (69%).

What is the History and Timelines of the Maratha Reservation Demand?

The Marathas are a caste that makes up about 33% of the state's population and includes landowners and peasants among other members.

Although the majority of Marathas speak Marathi, not everyone who speaks Marathi is a member of the Maratha community.

Timelines of the Maratha Reservation Demand

2017

Retired Justice N G Gaikwad led an 11-member commission that recommended Marathas be granted reservation under the Socially and Educationally Backward Class (SEBC).

2018

A bill requesting a 16% reservation for the Maratha community was passed by the Maharashtra Assembly.

2019

The Bombay High Court noted that the reservation should be lowered from 16% to 12% in school and 13% in employment even though it was upheld.

2020

The Chief Justice of India was tasked with overseeing a larger bench in this case when the Supreme Court of India halted its execution.

2021

The Supreme Court invalidated the Maratha reservation in 2021, citing the 1992 cap of 50% on all reservations.

The total reservation ceiling was raised to 64% and 65%, respectively, by the Maratha reservations of 12% and 13% in employment and education.

"The Supreme Court made it clear in the 1992 Indira Sawhney ruling that the 50% rule would apply unless there were very specific, unusual circumstances that would allow the inhabitants of distant and isolated areas to be brought into the mainstream.

The Supreme Court ruled that the state government of Maharashtra could not have exceeded the limit because there were no "extraordinary circumstances" or "exceptional circumstances" in the state."

Argument in favour of Maratha Reservation

The Shukre Commission's factual research highlights the socio-economic obstacles that the Maratha community faces, supporting the necessity of a reservation to elevate them out of poverty and marginalization.

The alarmingly high rate of farmer suicides among Marathas underscores the depth of their financial hardship and the pressing need for focused initiatives aimed at improving the community.

Because of their backwardness, Marathas have long been shut out of mainstream chances. Their representation and engagement in a variety of sectors can be improved by reservations in government employment and education, which promotes inclusive development.

Argument against the Maratha Reservation

There was debate over a draft notification that suggested recognizing "sage soyare"—extended cousins of Marathas with Kunbi lineage—as Kunbi people eligible for OBC reservation.

Several Maratha officials and activists voiced their displeasure with the separate reservation, saying they would rather be included in the OBC group.

Reservation might take care of short-term issues, but it might not deal with Maratha's underlying backwardness in a meaningful way. Sustainable development requires a multifaceted strategy that addresses problems with infrastructure, skill development, and education.

Conclusion

References