HC quashes 10.5% vanniyar quota, calls it ‘discriminatory’

HC quashes 10.5% vanniyar quota, calls it ‘discriminatory’

Repeals It Citing Seven Grounds

Sureshkumar.K@timesgroup.com

Chennai:02.11.2021

Holding that castebased reservation is impermissible, the Madras high court has quashed 10.5% quota law for vanniyars, introduced by the AIADMK government minutes before the Election Commission announced the April 2021 assembly election.

“Treating vanniyar community as a separate class from the other MBCs amounts to discrimination among same category of castes,” ruled a division bench of Justice M Duraiswamy and Justice K Murali Shankar on Monday.

The court decided to quash the reservation as unconstitutional on seven grounds, which included the competency of the state to provide reservation based on caste, whether reservation can be provided without quantifiable data on population, socio-educational status and representation of the backward classes in services.

Classification in name of caste is treating equals unequally: Court

Holding that the very basis of classification in the name of caste is a clear case treating equals unequally, resulting in reverse discrimination within the MBC, the judges said: “We conclude that there is no data, much less quantifiable data, available with the state before the introduction of the law, to show the three different degrees of backwardness to make three sub-categories, as mandated by Indra Sawhney case, nor there is a data to show the inadequate representation of a group.”

Ticking off the micro-classification of MBCs into MBC (vanniars), MBC (DNC) and other MBCs as being wholly arbitrary, the judges said there is absolutely no acceptable reason for the division. There is no material or data to differentiate MBC(V) from other MBC as a separate class.

Treating one caste — vanniakula kshatriya, including ‘vanniyar’, ‘vanniya’, ‘vannia gounder’, ‘gounder’ or ‘kander’, ‘padayachi’, ‘palli’ and ‘agnikula kshatriya’ — as separate class while treating the similar castes differently is discrimination, the judges held, adding that the impugned law categorised 6 subcastes and 115 other castes into two sets and tried to give higher proportion of reservation to one caste and deprive the others.

More importantly, referring to the union government’s constitutional 102nd amendment denuding states of the power to include castes in reserved lists, the judges said: “The Constitution (102nd Amendment) Act, 2018, came into existence on11.08.2018 and the Constitution (105th Amendment) Act, 2021, was enacted on 19.08.2021 and whereas the impugned Act 8 of 2021 came to be enacted on 26.02.2021 and therefore, we hold that as on the date of enactment of the impugned Act, the State Legislature has no power to enact such legislation and accordingly, the State Legislature has no competency to pass the impugned Act. The state legislature has no competency to enact Tamil Nadu Special Reservation of seats in educational Institutions including Private Educational Institutions and appointments or posts in the services under the State within the Reservation for the Most Backward Classes and Denotified Communities Act, 2021”.

Also, as per Article 31-B of the Constitution, until the Act placed in Ninth Schedule is amended or repealed by the competent legislature, the said Act shall continue to be in force, the court said. Therefore, without amending the 1993 Act, bringing a special legislation to provide internal reservation to vanniyar community is against the Constitutional provisions, the judges said.

When counsel arguing in favour of the state law sought to highlight the fact that quashing it would put a question mark on the prospects of candidates who had already been admitted under the10.5% quota, the court said: “It has been made clear through an interim order that admissions and appointments made providing the reservation will be subject to the outcome of the pleas. Suspending the order will only complicate the issue.”

The judges further recorded that ‘so far as the reservations for Muslims and arunthathiyars are concerned, the population figures are enumerated in every census and based on that, the backwardness and inadequate representation has been studied and a valid commission report has been submitted.

Is the state government empowered to do internal reservation. The Constitution has given enough explanation. The legislation providing for internal reservation is cancelled

– MADRAS HIGH COURT