Jharkhand Assembly raises quota to 77%

Jharkhand Assembly raises quota to 77%

Subject: Polity

Context:

• Jharkhand Assembly Passes Bill to Use 1932 Land Records to Determine Domicile Status
• Moreover, a bill to raise the total reservation to various categories to 77% was also passed.
• What is the issue:
  • The Jharkhand Assembly, at a special session on Friday, unanimously cleared two Bills,:

1. 1. One increasing reservation in vacant government posts and services in the state to 77%.
   2. Second, using land records with 1932 as the cut-off year to determine domicile status and who among the people fit the definition of local residents.

• The Bills will come into force only after the Centre carries out amendments to include these in the Ninth Schedule, putting it beyond judicial scrutiny.
• The first Bill, ‘Jharkhand Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (Amendment) Bill, 2022’, raised reservation from 60% to 77%. Within the reserved category, the Scheduled Castes will get a quota of 12%, up from 10%; 27% for OBCs, up from 14%; 28% for Scheduled Tribes, a 2% increase; and 10% for Economically Weaker Sections.
• The reservation will not apply to admissions in government-run universities or colleges.
• The second Bill, ‘Jharkhand Definition of Local Persons and for Extending the Consequential, Social, Cultural and Other Benefits to Such Local Persons Bill, 2022’, is aimed at granting local residents “certain rights, benefits, and preferential treatment” over their land; in their stake in local development of rivers, lakes, fisheries; in local traditional and cultural and commercial enterprises; in rights over agricultural indebtedness or availing agricultural loans; in maintenance and protection of land records; for their social security; in employment in private and public sector; and, for trade and commerce in the state.
• The Bill states that the definition of local persons, on the basis of the ‘1932 khatiyan’, is based on “living conditions, customs and the traditions and social development” of the “Moolvasis and people from tribal community”
• What are some Constitutional provision involved:
• Article 15(4) – Empowers the state to make special laws for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes.
• Article 16(4A) – Reservation in matters of promotion to any class or classes of posts in the services under the State in favour of SCs/STs, which are not adequately represented in the services under the State.
• Article 46 – The State shall promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, and, in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, and to protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation.
• Article 335 -The claims of the members of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes shall be taken into consideration, consistently with the maintenance of efficiency of administration, in the making of appointments to services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State.
• Article 341 and 342- Define as to who would be Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes with respect to any State·or Union Territory
• Some famous Supreme Court Judgements.
• State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan (1951):-Court ruled that caste-based reservations as per Communal Award violate Article 15(1) of the constitution
• Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India (1993):– The Supreme Court in a 9 judge bench verdict  while upholding the 27 % quota for backward classes, struck down the government notification reserving 10% government jobs for economically backward classes among the higher castes. The court also upheld the principle that the combined reservation beneficiaries should not exceed 50%.Moreover the concept of ‘creamy layer’ was introduced in the obc reservation. 
• Nagraj & Others v. Union of India and Others( 2006):- Upheld the 77th constitutional amendments which inserted Articles 16(4A) and 16(4B),
• Jarnail Singh vs Lachhmi Narain Gupta (2018):– Supreme Court holds that reservation in promotions does not require the state to collect quantifiable data on the backwardness of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes.
• Adherence of the Limit by the States:
• Many states have passed the law breaching the limit of 50% as set by Indra Sawhney judgement such as Maharashtra, Telangana,Tamil Nadu, Haryana and Chhattisgarh Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh.
• The apex court has decided to look into Tamil Nadu’s 69% quota law.But the 69% quota in the state pre-dates the Indra Sawhney judgement.