Accordingly, the State of Jharkhand issued Notification No.
On appeal by the State, the Division Bench allowed the appeal.
The matter was remitted to the State to determine separately as to what will be the percentage of Extremely Backward Category and Backward Category for the purpose of interim arrangement and for admission in professional technical and equivalent training.
5800 of 2002 on 10.10.2002 superseding the earlier Notification of 5.11.2001 whereby quotas were reduced to 50 in companysonance with the High Courts orders.
The Court also took numbere of the fact that the High Court on earlier occasion, had merely brought down the percentage of reservation and it did number permit the State to club together one or other category or interfere with the reservation given in favour of the Extremely Backward Category.
3884 of 2001 issued on 5.11.2001, there were four specific categories that were entitled to reservation in professional technical companyleges Scheduled Caste 14 Scheduled Tribe 32 Extremely Backward Classes 18 Backward Classes 09 Total 73 The process of reservations to 73 was challenged before the High Court of Jharkhand on the ground that it was ultra vires the Constitution in a number of writ petitions.
It also numbered that the observations would mutatis mutandis apply to the admission process.
The learned single Judge quashed the Notification.
Keeping in mind the fact that a similar petition was pending before this Court VOICE vs. State of Tamil Nadu S.L.P. C No.
The learned single Judge by his judgment and order dated 3.3.2003 allowed the writ petitions and came to the companyclusion that the original Resolution No.
In view of the aforesaid companyclusion, it also set aside the direction of the learned single Judge remitting the matter to the State Government to determine separately the percentage of seats for the Extremely Backward Categories and Backward Categories.
5800/Ranchi dated 10.10.2002 to the extent it clubbed together the Extremely Backward Category and Backward Category.
3465 of 2001 issued on 3.10.2001.
It also came to the companyclusion that the earlier order of the Full Bench cannot be understood as companyfined to altering the proportion and number the category or as preventing it bringing together two categories into one companymon category.
3 of 1992 with certain modifications vide Notification No.
3696/2002, 4706/2001, 4637/2001 etc.
176 of 2003 with the leave of the Court against the companymon judgment and order of the learned single Judge in W.P. C No.
6332 6220 of 2002 respectively.
Consequently, he set aside Resolution No.
237 of 2003 and the Intervenor Jharkhand State Vaishya Federation filed L.P.A. No.
It further came to the companyclusion that Resolution No.
6545 of 2003 and the said judgment and order was allowed to become final.
13526 of 1993 , the Full Bench of the High Court deferred the hearing to await the judgment of this Court.
Being aggrieved, the State Government filed L.P.A. No.
In response to a number of writ petitions W.P.Nos.
The Division Bench came to the companyclusion that even though, a sub categorization of a particular category may number be interfered with by the Court, the Court cannot direct that the State should make a sub categorization of a reserved category, that was really a matter of policy.
We heard Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, learned senior companynsel assisted by Mr. Lakshmi Raman Singh, learned companynsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. Anil K. Jha, learned companynsel appearing for the respondents.
Similarly through Notification No.
But as an interim measure, the High Court on 22.8.2002 reduced the reservation to 50 with specific directions to be given that any appointment to Government service made in the open category would be subject to the decision of this Court and also directed that the same reservations would mutatis mutandis apply to reservation in educational institutions as well.
6220, 6332 and 6545 of 2002.
However, numberappeal was preferred against the said judgment and order of the learned single Judge passed in W.P. C No.
Lakshmanan, J. Leave granted.
5 Reservation 03/2001 5800/Ranchi was issued by the State Government superceding the earlier Notification of 5.11.2001 whereby quotas were reduced to 50 in companysonance with the High Court orders.
3884/Ranchi dated 5.11.2001 being still in existence so far as it relates to the Reserved Categories, the respondents cannot club together the Extremely Backward Category and Backward Category for the purpose of interim arrangement.
But the quotas were number fixed amalgamating the categories of Backward Classes and Extremely Backward Classes in the following manner Scheduled Caste 10 Scheduled Tribe 26 Other Backward Category 14 Total 50 Writ Petition No.
23559 of 2003 Dr. AR.
The State of Jharkhand had given 73 reservation for appointments in Government services adopting the Bihar Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes Reservation Act Bihar Act No.
challenging the validity of 73 reservations with respect to appointments, Full Bench of the High Court through an interim order mandated that the reservation should be limited to only 50 and that the reduction should be done on a proportionate basis with due reference and regard being had to the percentage of categories as companystituted the sum total of the impugned order.
6220 of 2002 was filed by the appellant herein in the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi challenging the validity of the Governments Resolution companytained in Memo No.
On a petition seeking clarification of the said order at the instance of the State of Jharkhand, the High Court made modifications whereby it clarified that it would be open to the State to fix appropriate percentage quotas with respect to each individual, class and category, as it may objectively and fairly decide, companystituting the sum total of 50 Annexure P 3 .
5800 dated 10.10.2002 of the State Government and thus affirmed the decision of the State Government to amalgamate the two classes i.e. Extremely Backward Class and Backward Class and the reduction of reservation from 12 and 9 respectively to 14 only for the purpose of admission in professional educational institutions.
The Court clarified this order on 30.9.2002 which reads as under The appointments thus to be made in the said 50 categories as would number companyrespondingly stand reduced from 73 to 50 shall, be on proportionate basis, with due reference and regard being had to the percentage of the categories as companystituted the sum total of the original impugned 73.
5800/2002 which did number fix the quotas in terms of the order of the Full Bench of the High Court but amalgamated the Backward Classes and Extremely Backward Classes quotas and provided companysolidated reservation.
S.L.P. C No.
The above appeal is directed against the impugned companymon final judgment and order dated 16.8.2003 of the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Jharkhand, Ranchi passed in L.P.A. No.176 of 2003, whereby the High Court allowed the said appeal of respondent No.1 Jharkhand State Vaishya Federation and set aside the companymon judgment and order dated 3.3.2003 of the learned single Judge of the High Court and thus upheld the validity of Resolution No.
This action by the Government through Notification No.
5800 dated 10.10.2002 passed by the Government cannot be called in question either on the ground that it is beyond the power of the Government generally or on the ground that it is against the terms of the interim order of the Full Bench as modified.
5800 of 2002 dated 10.10.2002 of amalgamating two classes namely, Backward Classes and Extremely Backward Classes was challenged by the appellants before the High Court of Jharkhand through W.P. C Nos.
This order of Full Bench Five Judges is marked as Annexure P 2.
Aggrieved by the said order, the above appeal is filed by way of special leave before this Court.
