Centre's role very important in Maratha reservation matter: Ashok Chavan
Mar 03, 2021
Mumbai (Maharashtra) [India], March 3 : Maharashtra Minister Ashok Chavan on Wednesday said that the central government's role will be very important on the issue of Maratha reservation.
"During a question on Maratha reservation, we have replied and have discussed that the central government's role will be very important. As the hearing in the Supreme Court begins and the central government has also been made a party in this case, this case must be kept in front of a larger bench. This is a time for the central government also to get involved in it for Maratha reservation," said Chavan.
"There are many states in which the reservation has to exceed fifty per cent too," he added.
Last year on December 22, Chavan had chaired a meeting of the state cabinet's sub-committee on Maratha reservation and discussed the strategy of the state government to be adopted in the final hearing of the matter before the Supreme Court which started from January 25.
The top court later posted for March 8 the final hearing of petitions challenging the Bombay High Court verdict upholding reservations to Marathas in jobs and education under Maharashtra Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2018.
A five-judge constitution bench headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan said the matter will now be listed on March 8 for final hearing and it proposed to complete the hearing by March 18.
The top court in 2019 had restrained the Maharashtra government by an interim order to implement the quota law.
The Bombay High Court had on June 27, 2019, observed that the 50 per cent cap on total reservations imposed by the Supreme Court could be exceeded in exceptional circumstances.
An appeal filed in the top court by advocate Sanjeet Shukla, a representative of Youth for Equality, said the SEBC Act, 2018, enacted to grant reservation to the Maratha community people in jobs and education, breached the 50 per cent ceiling on reservation fixed by the apex court in its judgment in the Indira Sawhney case
