Is Gujarat's 27% OBC Quota in Local Bodies Legally Justified?

Click to start listening
Is Gujarat's 27% OBC Quota in Local Bodies Legally Justified?

Synopsis

A Supreme Court petition questions Gujarat's increase of OBC reservation in local bodies from 10% to 27%. The petition raises concerns over constitutional compliance, lack of data, and potential unfairness in elections, calling for urgent judicial intervention.

Key Takeaways

  • Legal challenge against OBC quota increase
  • Concerns over constitutional validity
  • Lack of public access to the Commission's report
  • Implications for upcoming local elections
  • Call for guidelines on OBC reservations

New Delhi, Aug 3 (NationPress) A legal challenge has been lodged in the Supreme Court against the Gujarat Local Authorities Laws (Amendment) Act, 2023, which has escalated the reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in local governance from 10 percent to 27 percent.

The petition was submitted by advocate Sudhanshu Prakash under Article 32 of the Constitution. It argues that the amendment breaches constitutional principles, lacks empirical validation, and contradicts prior Supreme Court rulings regarding reservations in local bodies.

The petitioners, including Vora Jaimin and others, noted that although the Gujarat government established a Commission led by retired Justice K.S. Jhaveri in July 2022, its report, delivered in April 2023, remains undisclosed.

“Given that the Commission's findings, which are foundational to the Amendment Act, are not publicly accessible, it suggests that the Amending Act is unsupported by any verifiable data. The absence of the report means there is no framework to evaluate the legitimacy of the reservation dictated by the Amending Act,” the petition asserts.

It claims that the state has not adhered to the “triple test” established by the Supreme Court in Vikas Kishanrao Gawali vs. State of Maharashtra, which stipulates that any OBC reservation in local authorities must be preceded by: (1) A dedicated Commission performing a thorough empirical investigation; (2) Specific reservation allocations for local bodies informed by that data; and (3) A cap ensuring that total reservations for SCs, STs, and OBCs do not surpass 50 percent.

The petition argues that the amendment seems to mechanically boost OBC reservation to 27 percent without a proper assessment of the community’s actual political backwardness or representation requirements.

“The indiscriminate application of service law percentages (such as 27 percent) to the electoral domain is not permissible,” the plea states.

The petitioners, all candidates from the unreserved category for the approaching local body elections, claim they are being unjustly barred from participating due to excessive reservation.

With elections in various Gram Panchayats and Taluka Panchayats slated for August-September, they have requested immediate intervention from the Supreme Court.

The plea seeks a directive to annul the Gujarat Local Authorities Laws (Amendment) Act, 2023, and calls on the Supreme Court to establish guidelines for evaluating OBC political backwardness to avert excessive reservations in local bodies. According to the court's published causelist, a bench led by Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi will hear the matter on Monday (August 4).

Point of View

It is vital to remain impartial while recognizing that this legal challenge raises critical questions about the balance between affirmative action and fair representation. Ensuring that all voices are heard in the democratic process is essential, and the Supreme Court's ruling will likely have lasting impacts on local governance in Gujarat.
NationPress
05/09/2025

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Gujarat Local Authorities Laws (Amendment) Act, 2023?
This Act increases the reservation for Other Backward Classes in local bodies from 10% to 27%, impacting electoral participation.
Why is there a legal challenge against this amendment?
The petition argues that the amendment violates constitutional principles and lacks empirical support, failing to meet Supreme Court mandates for OBC reservations.
Who filed the petition?
The petition was filed by advocate Sudhanshu Prakash on behalf of petitioners including Vora Jaimin, challenging the legality of the amendment.
What is the 'triple test' mentioned in the petition?
The 'triple test' requires a dedicated Commission to conduct empirical inquiry, local body-wise specification of reservations, and ensuring total reservations do not exceed 50%.
What are the potential consequences of this legal challenge?
The outcome may affect the electoral landscape in Gujarat and set precedents for how reservations are determined and justified in local bodies.