Bengal OBC Case: SC To Hear Pleas Challenging Calcutta HC Order On Jan 28, 29

The Supreme Court has slated the final adjudication for January 28 and 29 concerning the State of West Bengal’s petition against the Calcutta High Court’s annulment of the OBC classification of 77 communities.

A bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih presided over the preliminary proceedings. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing West Bengal, emphasized the urgency of a resolution before the next academic session commences. Justice Gavai assured that a verdict would be rendered prior to the Court’s summer recess in May.

During the session, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta apprised the bench of the National Commission for Backward Classes’ affidavit submission. Notably, in August of the preceding year, a bench headed by former Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, while issuing notice on the state’s appeal, directed West Bengal to elucidate the procedural framework adopted for the classification of the 77 communities. Specifically, the bench sought a comprehensive account of the survey methodology and clarification regarding any omission of consultative engagement with the backward classes commission for communities on the list.

High Court’s Judgment

The Calcutta High Court had previously deliberated on a petition challenging specific provisions of the West Bengal Backward Classes (Other than Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) (Reservation of Vacancies in Services and Posts) Act, 2012, which provided for reservations in public sector employment for OBCs. Upon review, the High Court identified procedural lapses and opined that both the Commission and the state government exhibited undue haste.

The Court remarked that the Commission’s actions appeared politically motivated, ostensibly aimed at realizing a public commitment made by the then Chief Minister during a political rally. It noted the absence of a rigorous inquiry process and the failure to properly solicit applications for inclusion in the OBC list.

Additionally, the Court underscored the lack of a public notification inviting objections post-list preparation, characterizing this omission as a breach of constitutional protocol. The authorities’ failure to disclose empirical data substantiating the alleged inadequate representation of these communities in state services further compounded the procedural deficiencies. The absence of transparency, including the non-publication of reports, deprived stakeholders of the opportunity to contest the findings.

Moreover, the High Court criticized the state’s bypassing of the statutory commission in its recommendations for OBC sub-classification. The judgment highlighted that 41 out of the 42 newly designated classes for reservation predominantly comprised Muslim communities. It underscored that the Commission’s primary criterion appeared to be religion-centric rather than socio-economic backwardness.

Consequently, the Court concluded that the state’s actions contravened constitutional mandates by instituting protective discrimination on religious grounds under the guise of backward class upliftment.

In summation, the High Court determined that the recommendations were ostensibly designed to fulfill sectarian objectives rather than addressing genuine socio-economic disparities. The Supreme Court’s impending verdict will be pivotal in assessing the legitimacy of these findings and shaping the trajectory of OBC classification in West Bengal.

Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International