In a recent development, the Supreme Court declined to provide interim relief to the Bihar government, refusing to stay the Patna High Court’s decision that invalidated the state’s increased reservation quota. The Patna High Court had struck down Bihar’s legislative amendments which sought to boost reservations for Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC) from 50% to 65% for jobs and educational institutions.
The Bihar government had appealed to the Supreme Court to temporarily halt the High Court’s ruling, but their plea was denied. The High Court’s judgment had emerged from a series of petitions challenging the new reservation limits, arguing that they violated the 50% cap established in the landmark case of Indra Sawhney v. Union of India. The High Court asserted that this cap is a constitutional requirement under Articles 15(4) and 16(4) and that the current situation did not meet the criteria for exceptions to this rule.
According to the High Court, the principle of adequate representation under these constitutional provisions does not support an increase beyond the 50% limit without specific, justifiable reasons related to exceptional circumstances. Consequently, the court deemed the amendments unconstitutional and in breach of the equality clauses enshrined in Articles 14, 15, and 16.
