NDLI: Pattali Makkal Katchi Vs. A. Mayilerumperumal & Ors.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Tamil Nadu Special Reservation of seats
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7 Referred Case 8 Referred Case 9 Referred Case 10 Referred Case 11 Referred Case 12 Referred Case 13 Referred Case 14 Referred Case 15 Referred Case 16 Referred Case 17 Referred Case 18 Referred Case 19 Referred Case 20 Referred Case 21 Referred Case 22 Referred Case 23 Referred Case 24 Referred Case 25 Referred Case 26 Referred Case 27 Referred Case 28 Referred Case 29 Referred Case 30 Referred Case 31
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Disposed Off
Headnote	Tamil Nadu Special Reservation of seats in Educational Institutions including Private Educational Institutions and of appointments or posts in the services under the State within the Reservation for the Most Backward Classes and Denotified Communities Act, 2021 – Tamil Nadu Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of seats in Educational Institutions and of appointments or posts in the Services under the State) Act, 1993 – ss. 2, 3(a), 4, 5 & 7 – Validity of 2021 Act – Backward Class Reservation – Reservation of seats in educational institutions – Reservation in appointments or posts in the services under the state – Classification of Backward Classes – An Act (2021 Act) for special reservation within 20% reserved Most Backward Classes (MBCs) and Denotified Communities (DNCs) was passed by State assembly – The bill provides reservation of seats in private educational institutions, and reservation in appointment or posts in the services under the State – 10.5% reservation was specifically earmarked for the Vanniyakula Kshatriya community – Writ petitions were filed in the High Court assailing the constitutional validity of 2021 Act – The High Court held that the State Legislature had no competence to enact the 2021 Act and there was no quantifiable data – The High Court further found that the internal reservation made only on the basis of caste is violative of Constitution – On appeal, held: There is no bar on the legislative competence of the State to enact the 2021 Act – State Government has the competence to classify the Vanniakula Kshatriyas or any other community or group of communities within backward classes as a particular class for the grant of special measures, there should be a reasonable basis for categorising such communities into a different section from the rest of the communities within the MBCs and DNCs, on grounds which cannot be superficial or illusory – By taking into account the population of the Vanniakula Kshatriyas as enumerated in the report of the Ambasankar Commission in 1985, the Chairman recommended internal reservation, i.e., 10.5 per cent – Any study by the Commission should be with regard to the present status since the object is to take affirmative actions in present or in future to address the needs of a particular community – There was no substantial basis for classifying the Vanniakula Kshatriyas into one group to be treated differentially from the remaining 115 communities within the MBCs and DNCs, and therefore, the 2021 Act is in violation of Articles 14, 15 and 16.Constitution of India – Art. 341 – 102nd Amendment Act – Sub Categorisation of Classes – What the 102nd Amendment prohibits the State from undertaking is identifying a caste as SEBC or including or excluding a community from the list notified by the President – A close scrutiny of E.V. Chinnaiah would make it clear that the High Court was wrong in relying upon the said judgment to hold that sub classification of backward classes is beyond the legislative competence of the State – A Presidential list for SEBCs did not come into existence and the question of sub-division of the said list by way of the 2021 Act does not arise.Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951 – Article 31-B – It is settled law that any amendment made to a statute placed under the Ninth Schedule does not get protection under Article 31-B, unless the said amendment is also included in the Ninth Schedule – Thus, Article 31-B does not operate as a hurdle for the State to enact statutes on matters ancillary to the 1994 Act – It is made clear that it was open to the State to have amended the 1994 Act – At the same time, it cannot be said that the State Legislature lacked competence to enact a legislation for determining the extent of reservation amongst the MBCs and DNCs.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Nageswara Rao
Neutral Citation	2022 INSC 378
Petitioner	Pattali Makkal Katchi
Respondent	A. Mayilerumperumal & Ors.
SCR	[2022] 19 S.C.R. 42
Judgement Date	2022-03-31
Case Number	2600

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Pattali Makkal Katchi Vs. A. Mayilerumperumal & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

M. Rathinaswami & Ors. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors. Etc.

Premium Granites and Anr. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors.

K. Madalaimuthu and Anr. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors.

S. Thilagavathy Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors.

A. Deivendran Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

The Government of Tamil Nadu and Ors. Vs. M. Ananchu Asari and Ors.

Premanand R. Shenoy Vs. Custodian and Ors.

Chinnamal Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors.

Secretary, School Committee, Thiruvalluvar Higher Secondary School Vs. The Govt. of Tamil Nadu and Ors.

Pattali Makkal Katchi Vs. A. Mayilerumperumal & Ors.

Pattali Makkal Katchi Vs. A. Mayilerumperumal & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

M. Rathinaswami & Ors. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors. Etc.

Premium Granites and Anr. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors.

K. Madalaimuthu and Anr. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors.

S. Thilagavathy Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors.

A. Deivendran Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

The Government of Tamil Nadu and Ors. Vs. M. Ananchu Asari and Ors.

Premanand R. Shenoy Vs. Custodian and Ors.

Chinnamal Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors.

Secretary, School Committee, Thiruvalluvar Higher Secondary School Vs. The Govt. of Tamil Nadu and Ors.

Pattali Makkal Katchi Vs. A. Mayilerumperumal & Ors.