Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has ruled that reservation for backward classes cannot be determined in proportion to their population, observing that the Constitution mandates “adequate representation” rather than “proportionate representation” and that equating the two would undermine the principle of equality.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice K.S. Hemalekha made the observations while striking down a law that increased reservation for Scheduled Castes (SCs) from 15% to 17% and for Scheduled Tribes (STs) from 3% to 7%, taking the total reservation beyond the 50% ceiling.
The Karnataka government had defended the increase, arguing that the combined population of SCs and STs in the state had risen to 24.1%, while their reservation quota remained at 18%.
Citing the 2020 report of the H.N. Nagamohan Das Commission, headed by a retired High Court judge, the state submitted that SCs constituted 17.15% of Karnataka’s population in 2011, while STs accounted for 6.95%. It argued that the existing quota did not reflect the demographic changes.
Rejecting the contention, the Bench said the fundamental premise that reservation for backward classes must be proportionate to their population was erroneous.
The court noted that the principle of proportionate representation finds constitutional recognition under Articles 330 and 332, which deal with the reservation of seats for SCs and STs in the Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies. However, it said this principle could not be extended to Article 16(4), which provides for reservation in public employment for inadequately represented backward classes.
The Bench also cautioned that accepting population as the basis for determining reservation would be “destructive of the principle of equality” enshrined in the Constitution.
It observed that demographic changes among backward classes could not be examined in isolation to justify breaching the 50% reservation ceiling. Changes in the population of forward classes must also be considered while assessing the adequacy of representation in government services and educational institutions.
The court further held that once a class is identified as backward, its reservation cannot automatically be fixed in proportion to its population, as such an approach would weaken the constitutional principle of equality, which forms part of the Constitution’s basic structure.
Additionally, the Bench found that the state had failed to establish extraordinary circumstances warranting a breach of the 50% ceiling. It also noted that the government had not fulfilled the mandatory requirement of consulting the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes before enacting the law.
The ruling reinforces the distinction between adequate representation and population-based quotas in determining reservation policy.
