[OBC Reservation case] Calcutta High Court wants to run State: West Bengal to Supreme Court

The West Bengal government on Monday hit out at the Calcutta High Court for its critical remarks against the State while quashing a decision to identify various classes in the State as Other Backward Classes (OBC) [State of West Bengal vs Amal Chandra Das]..In arguments made before the Supreme Court, the West Bengal government's counsel questioned whether the High Court was trying to run the State.The Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was hearing an appeal filed by the West Bengal government against the High Court's May 2024 judgment..In this judgment, the High Court remarked that the Muslim community was treated like a "commodity for political ends" when the West Bengal government classified 77 classes of Muslims as "backward."Representing the State of West Bengal, Senior Advocate Indira Jaising argued that there has been a complete judicial overreach by the High Court. "Why is all this happening.. because these are Muslims?? and they say it is about religion... Complete falsehood. It is being said that I made reservations because there are Muslims... We have report after report to show that all communities have been considered. Mandal Commission criteria have been followed. State wants to run the State... but if Court wants to run it, then let them.. How should we? Please answer!" she argued..After hearing preliminary submissions, the Court has issued notice on the State's appeal as well as its interim prayer for a stay on the High Court decision. The Court has asked the State to answer what quantifiable data was followed to identify the 77 communities as OBC and answer if there was any lack of consultation in the process."State shall show if any consultation was carried out with the commission to identify the OBC and State shall also show the nature of surveys, etc. that was adhered to. State needs to clarify this," the Court ordered..During the hearing, the Court observed that the High Court's decision to quash key provisions of the West Bengal Backward Classes (Other than Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) (Reservation of Vacancies in Services and Posts) Act, 2012 had a radical impact."The identification was done without [West Bengal State Backward Class] commission reference.. that is the argument. To strike down the Act has radical impact... no reservation for West Bengal at all. This is radical, Mr [Mukul] Rohatgi (who represented the respondents)," CJI Chandrachud remarked..Jaising argued today that as a consequence of several provisions of the statute being struck down, all reservations in the State of West Bengal had come to a halt."HC says, it is for the commission has to do this and not the State. The commission was formed in 1993 and the law in 2012. State brought a law on how a caste certificate will be granted and on what basis.. This list goes to the State and State applies its mind.. HC says no, and HC says this function to be performed by Commission and not State," she said.While arguing for a stay on the High Court judgment, Jaising said,"Let me tell you of the consequences of striking down a list.. Court says, entire list .. the roster has been struck down. How am I to make reservations since the roster and list has been struck down? .. Every time you make an entry you go to the legislature.. entire State has no reservation.. This affects NEET as well as we have reservation in education also... We cannot live in a situation which has no reservation for OBC in the State of West Bengal. 39 percent of the State population is OBC.".There were forceful submissions on the opposing side as well with Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi calling the State's decision an "absolute fraud" on the Constitution of India."This is an egregious case and no notice should be issued," the senior counsel said.Senior Advocate PS Patwalia, who was also representing the respondents, argued that the State's decision was politically motivated. After the Chief Minister had made a statement that 77 of a caste will be made an OBC, the same was done, he recounted."Once the Chief Minister made a promise, the commission was in a tearing hurry to identify a section as OBC... This is how it worked," he contended.Rohatgi added that the High Court had held that there was a strong doubt as to whether there was any survey done at all to identify which castes required the reservation. The reservation may have been extended to "pre-identified castes" and on the basis of religion, the senior counsel said while referring to the High Court's ruling..The Court at this stage said there was no case for stay and that it would hear the matter in detail."Since pre-existing situation was not disturbed.. there is no case of stay. But we will hear it in detail," CJI Chandrachud said.The Court also asked the State to show quantifiable data for its decision and to make submissions on whether it was the Commission that categorised the communities that were extended the reservation."Only the Commission did it, my submissions are very clear," Jaising replied..Before parting with the matter for the day, CJI Chandrachud added,"Our minds are open. Prima facie, all findings in HC judgment are against you and that is why we are giving a chance to the State to displace those findings. Let the affidavit be filed within a week."The Court will hear the matter next on August 16. .Senior Advocates Maninder Singh and Ranjit Kumar also represented the respondents..Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.