Jat stir: Punjab and Haryana High Court upholds Haryana quota law, state panel to decide extent

The legislation was passed by the BJP government in Haryana, a month after the violent February 2016 Jat agitation in which 30 people lost their lives and divided the state along Jat and non-Jat lines.

Written by Sofi Ahsan | Chandigarh | Published:September 1, 2017 9:14 pm
jat reservation verdict, punjab haryana hc, jat people, jat quota judgement, punjab haryana high court, jat quota haryana, jat agitation, high court chandigarh, kuk, jaat aarakshan, jaat reservation news, jaat reservation in haryana latest news, jaat reservation latest news, jat reservation facebook, indian express The High Court division bench of Justice S S Saron and Justice Lisa Gill, while ruling on a petition challenging the Act, ordered that the reservation provisions will continue to remain in abeyance till a decision is taken on the government panel report. (File Photo)

The Punjab and Haryana High Court Friday upheld the Haryana Backward Classes (Reservation in Services and Admissions in Educational Institutions) Act passed by the state assembly last year to provide 10 per cent reservation in government jobs and institutes of higher education to Jats and five other communities in the state.

The High Court, however, referred the matter to the State Backward Classes Commission for examination of “quantifiable data” and determination of the extent of reservation, extending the stay on the Act’s implementation till March 31, 2018, the deadline given to the commission. Benefits of the Act to the communities concerned will continue to remain in abeyance until then.

The legislation was passed by the BJP government in Haryana, a month after the violent February 2016 Jat agitation in which 30 people lost their lives and divided the state along Jat and non-Jat lines. Haryana already has 20 per cent reservation for Scheduled Castes, 27 per cent for two categories of Backward Classes, and another 10 per cent for Economically Weaker Sections. The Act envisages an additional 10 per cent quota for a third category of Backward Classes that will include Jat, Jat Sikh, Tyagi, Bishnoi and Ror communities.

The High Court division bench of Justice S S Saron and Justice Lisa Gill, while ruling on a petition challenging the Act, ordered that the reservation provisions will continue to remain in abeyance till a decision is taken on the government panel report. It was Justice Saron’s last working day — he retires after 15 years as a judge in the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

The reservation provisions had already been under stay since May 2016 after a PIL was filed in the High Court, challenging the validity of the provisions of the Act which grant 10 per cent quota in Class III and IV posts and six per cent quota in Class I and II posts to Jats, Jat Sikhs, Rors, Bishnois, Tyagis and Muslim Jats — Backward Class Block ‘C’. Besides, there is also a provision of 10 per cent reservation in educational institutions.

The commission has been asked to complete the report before March 31 next year for consideration of the government. “The commission will determine the extent of the quota and submit its report before the deadline,” said Lokesh Sinhal, Haryana’s Additional Advocate General. He said the stay on the provisions related to the six communities will continue till the decision is taken.

The state government has been asked to provide quantifiable data containing information on backwardness of the class and its representation in public employment till November 30. The information can also be collected by the panel itself and it will have to be put it on its website for objections till December 31. The quantifiable data will contain information showing backwardness of the class and inadequacy of its representation in public employment.

Murari Lal Gupta, a Bhiwani resident, had challenged the Act saying it was against the Supreme Court judgment in the Indira Sawhney case fixing a 50 per cent ceiling on reservation. The six communities, including Jats, have been categorised as Backward Classes Block ‘C’ in the schedule. “The full judgment copy is awaited but what I can say is the decision to uphold the law is contrary to the directions. Either the court had to uphold the law or dismiss my petition. The final order is totally contradictory and will be clear once the judgment copy is available,” Gupta’s counsel Mukesh Kumar Verma said.

The petitioner had submitted that reservation for Jats under the new Act had been made on the basis of the Justice K C Gupta Commission report which had already been quashed by the Supreme Court in Ram Singh vs Union of India (2015) case in which the reservation of Jat community in the Central List of Other Backward Classes had been set aside.