Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
Top Stories

Chandrashekhar Azad Files Review Against SC Verdict On Reservation In Promotions [Read Petition]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
11 Feb 2020 11:41 AM GMT
Chandrashekhar Azad Files Review Against SC Verdict On Reservation In Promotions [Read Petition]
x

Bhim Army Chief Chandrashekhar Azad on Tuesday filed a review petition in the Supreme Court against its February 7 verdict which held that there was no fundamental right to claim reservation in promotions.The petition stated that the verdict suffered from "error apparent on record" as it violated the principles of equality in opportunities under Articles 16(1) and 16(4) of the Constitution,...

Bhim Army Chief Chandrashekhar Azad on Tuesday filed a review petition in the Supreme Court against its February 7 verdict which held that there was no fundamental right to claim reservation in promotions.

The petition stated that the verdict suffered from "error apparent on record" as it violated the principles of equality in opportunities under Articles 16(1) and 16(4) of the Constitution, and the principles in the judgments of Constitution Benches in M Nagraj and Jarnail Singh cases.

"The impugned judgment is not only sweeping in its scope, but has intermingled various propositions and laid down principles that are erroneous on the face of the record and severely detrimental to the interests of the SC, ST which as per the judgment of the Constitutional Bench in Indira Sawhney are the most backward amongst backward classes", the petition stated.

"While accepting that Article 16(4) and 16 (4 A) are enabling provisions, the impugned judgment has lost sight of the fact that Article 16 mandates equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State", the petition filed through Advocate Mehmood Pracha added.

Further it is contended that, 

"The impugned judgment has held that the State Governments are not bound to make reservations in recruitment/appointments which is in direct violation of the judgment of the Constitution Bench in M. Nagraj".

Major Supreme Court Judgments On Reservation In Promotions

The review petition stated that the impugned judgment will act as a "tool in the hands of the oppressors to further oppress and exploit the SC, ST, OBC and the economically weaker sections, causing further marginalization within the society, thereby defeating the endeavor to bring equality between the citizens of this country by the framers of our Constitution particularly those of Baba Sahab Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar".

Azad, who was not a party in the original case in which the judgment was rendered, states in the petition that he has been acclaimed and accepted as the leader of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities all over the country owing to his involvement in several movements for safeguarding their rights.

"He is a staunch follower of the ideology of Baba Sahab Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar and has for long struggled against the Manuvadi forces who are hell bend upon suppressing the weaker sections of the society by strong arm tactics misusing even the state machinery", the plea said about Azad.

On February 7, the Supreme Court held in the case Mukesh Kumar vs State of Uttarakhand that Article 16 (4) and 16 (4-A) are mere enabling provisions and they do not confer fundamental right to claim reservations in promotion.

The bench of Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice Hemant Gupta observed that no mandamus can be issued by the Court to the State to collect quantifiable data relating to adequacy of representation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in public services.

The decision has created an uproar and the matter was discussed in the Lok Sabha yesterday, where the Central Government said that it was studying the matter.

Click here to download petition

Read Petition



Next Story