The Karnataka government has filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court, challenging a High Court verdict that struck down an increase in reservations for Scheduled Castes (SCs) from 15% to 17% and for Scheduled Tribes (STs) from 3% to 7%. The petition was filed on 28 October 2026, just 16 days after the Cabinet approved the appeal on 15 October 2026, according to a statement from the Chief Minister's Office (CMO) released on 11 November 2026.

The Legal Battle

The Cabinet formally authorised the SLP through a government order dated 27 October 2026. The High Court, in its verdict, had held that consultation with the National Commissions for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes was mandatory before enhancing reservations, and that letters sent to the commissions after the law was enacted did not satisfy this requirement. The state government argues the increased quota is essential to protect the rights of the most marginalised communities in Karnataka.

Alongside the legal challenge, the Congress government said it had implemented an interim safeguard: an additional 6% of posts earmarked for SC and ST candidates have been placed under a backlog arrangement across 56,432 recruitment posts approved in February 2026, ensuring candidates do not forfeit their share pending a final verdict.

The Ninth Schedule Push

Central to the state government's strategy is securing inclusion of the enhanced reservation in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution, which would shield it from judicial review. The Karnataka Legislative Assembly passed a resolution to this effect on 18 December 2025, urging the Centre to extend constitutional protection to the state's 56% total reservation. However, on 25 July 2026, the Union government informed Parliament that the request would be deferred while the matter remained before the High Court.

The state government said efforts to persuade the Centre to include the enhanced quota in the Ninth Schedule would continue, describing it as the only permanent legal shield against future challenges.

The Congress–BJP Political Contest

The ruling Congress government in Karnataka has sharply criticised the previous Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) administration, alleging that it squandered multiple opportunities to secure constitutional protection. The government pointed out that the Justice H.N. Nagamohan Das Commission had recommended the reservation hike as far back as July 2020 and explicitly advised its inclusion in the Ninth Schedule.

Instead, the Congress alleged, then Law Minister J.C. Madhuswamy publicly stated on 7 October 2022 that the enhancement would be placed in the Ninth Schedule — only for the BJP to issue an ordinance and subsequently pass legislation just weeks before the 2023 Assembly elections, without securing the constitutional amendment. Notably, A. Narayanaswamy, then BJP Member of Parliament from Chitradurga and Union Minister of State for Social Justice and Empowerment, stated in Parliament on 21 March 2023 that no proposal regarding the reservation increase had been received from Karnataka. The state wrote to the Centre on the issue only two days later — with just seven weeks remaining before the elections.

The Congress government further pointed out that Karnataka currently has five Union Ministers and 19 BJP and JD(S) MPs in the Lok Sabha, yet no constitutional amendment has been moved to protect the enhanced reservation.

Internal Reservation and What Comes Next

Beyond the Supreme Court petition, the state government has also implemented internal reservation within the Scheduled Castes category, ensuring that the most backward sub-groups among SCs receive a proportionate share of the quota benefits. The government said it would pursue both the Supreme Court litigation and efforts to secure a constitutional amendment in coordination with the Centre.

With the Supreme Court petition now filed and the Ninth Schedule route still contested, the fate of reservation for lakhs of SC and ST applicants in Karnataka hinges on how quickly the apex court takes up the matter — and whether the Centre ultimately moves a constitutional amendment.