The Supreme Court asked the center on Tuesday what measures it had taken to justify its decision on promotion quotas for employees belonging to the scheduled castes (SC) and scheduled tribes (ST) because of their underrepresentation and retention in their work Will not adversely affect the overall administrative efficiency.
The three judge seats headed by Judge L Nageswara Rao stated that if a judicial challenge is raised against the quotas for promotion of a specific cadre to SC and ST, the government will have to claim that they are under-represented among specific cadres and the quota granted is not appropriate. Will adversely affect the overall administrative efficiency. “Please don’t argue about the principle. Show us the data. How do you justify the reservation in the promotion, and what steps you have taken to justify these decisions.
Please accept the instructions and let us know this,” by the judge The bench composed of Sanjiv Khanna and BR Gavai. In the beginning, the Attorney General KK Venugopal, who represented the center, referred to the Supreme Court’s judgment, from the 1992 Indra Sawhney judgment (commonly referred to as the Mandal Commission case) to the 2018 Jarail Singh judgment. Mandal’s decision ruled out the promotion quota. “Relevant is that Indra Sawhney’s judgment involved backward classes, not SCs and STs,” the legal official said. “This judgment involves the question of whether each category should be reserved in proportion to its population. Then it said’should not be given this way,” because then it would far exceed the 50% upper limit,” he said.
He said that Article 16 of the Constitution requires equality in public employment. If only performance is the standard, then the disadvantaged SC and ST in society may not be able to compete.
News Source : NDTV
