New Delhi: The Supreme Court has remanded a batch of cases concerning the enhancement of Other Backward Classes (OBC) reservation in public employment in Madhya Pradesh back to the Madhya Pradesh High Court, directing it to examine the issue comprehensively and dispose of the matter expeditiously. The dispute centres on the State’s decision to increase OBC reservation from 14 per cent to 27 per cent, a move that has remained embroiled in litigation for nearly five years due to concerns over breaching the 50 per cent reservation ceiling laid down by constitutional jurisprudence.
The controversy traces its origins to the enactment of the Madhya Pradesh Lok Seva (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1994, passed in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s landmark Indra Sawhney judgment. Under the 1994 Act, reservation in public employment was fixed at 16 per cent for Scheduled Castes (SCs), 20 per cent for Scheduled Tribes (STs), and 14 per cent for OBCs. This structure continued even after the reorganisation of the State, with Madhya Pradesh retaining the same reservation framework.
Over the years, however, there was a sustained demand within the State to raise OBC reservation to 27 per cent, bringing it in line with policies adopted by some other States. The demand remained unfulfilled for a long period due to the judicially evolved ceiling of 50 per cent on total reservations. Eventually, in March 2019, the Governor of Madhya Pradesh promulgated an Ordinance amending the 1994 Act to increase OBC reservation to 27 per cent. The Ordinance was later replaced by the Madhya Pradesh Lok Seva (Reservation for SC, ST and OBC) Amendment Act, 2019, which was notified in the State Gazette on 24 December 2019.
The enhanced reservation was immediately challenged before the Madhya Pradesh High Court through multiple writ petitions. In March 2019, the High Court passed interim orders restraining the State from implementing the increased quota pending final adjudication. Similar interim stays continued even after the Ordinance was replaced by the Amendment Act.
Despite the subsisting restraints, the State Government issued recruitment advertisements and corrigenda in 2021 and 2022 providing for 27 per cent OBC reservation, and a General Administration Department order dated 2 September 2021 directed that the enhanced quota be implemented in all recruitments except those already under judicial challenge. These actions triggered fresh litigation, and in May 2022, the High Court once again restrained the State from providing OBC reservation beyond 14 per cent in the impugned recruitments.
While the matters were pending, the State approached the Supreme Court through transfer petitions, arguing that similar issues were already under consideration before the apex court, including challenges related to reservation enhancement in Chhattisgarh. The Supreme Court allowed one such transfer petition in August 2024, bringing the Madhya Pradesh cases before it.
Seeking relief from the prolonged interim stays, the State filed interlocutory applications urging the Supreme Court to permit recruitments to proceed with 27 per cent OBC reservation, citing an acute shortage of manpower across departments. The State relied heavily on a May 2023 Supreme Court order in the Chhattisgarh reservation matter, where appointments and promotions were allowed to proceed subject to the final outcome of the case.
However, the Supreme Court declined to mechanically apply the Chhattisgarh precedent to Madhya Pradesh. The Bench observed that affirmative action policies and reservation requirements vary significantly from State to State, depending on social composition and local conditions. It held that the High Court of Madhya Pradesh was the most appropriate forum to examine the legality, necessity, and constitutional validity of the enhanced reservation in the first instance.
The Court further noted that all the orders passed by the High Court so far were interim in nature and that it would be inappropriate for the Supreme Court to adjudicate the issue directly under Article 32 without the benefit of a detailed factual and legal analysis by the High Court. At the same time, acknowledging the prolonged pendency and administrative impact, the apex court sought to balance competing interests.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court remanded the entire batch of civil appeals, special leave petitions, transferred cases, and writ petitions to the Madhya Pradesh High Court. It requested the Chief Justice of the High Court to constitute a special bench to hear the matters and dispose of them preferably within three months. The High Court has also been given liberty to consider interlocutory applications regarding interim arrangements during the pendency of the proceedings.
Importantly, the Supreme Court clarified that it had expressed no opinion on the merits of the case or on the validity of the enhanced OBC reservation. The final determination on whether the 27 per cent quota withstands constitutional scrutiny will now rest with the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
