Says decision was based on a report by an external agency
The Government’s poll-eve decision to include Jats under OBC quota was based on a report by an external agency, the Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR), the Centre told the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
While refusing to stay the order of Centre extending reservation benefits to Jats, the court clarified that any appointment or admission given to Jats under OBC quota will be subject to the outcome of the writ petitions heard by it.
Defending the charge that the largesse given to Jats in nine states was a political decision aimed to garner votes in the General Elections the Centre produced the Cabinet records in Court to show how the ICSSR report highlighted the social, educational and economic backwardness of Jats in six states. This formed the material for the Centre to overrule a contrary advice by the National Commission for Backward Classes, which had denied the proposal for adding Jats under OBCs, way back in 1997.
Going through the records, the bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam said, “We are prima facie satisfied there was material that the Cabinet has considered.” However, it allowed the Centre to put all the material in an affidavit to be filed within three weeks. The Court decided to hear the matter on May 1, asking the petitioners opposing the Jat reservation to submit their arguments on that date.
Appearing for the Centre, senior advocate K Parasaran and ASG KV Vishwanathan produced the records of the Cabinet meeting held on March 4 where a note prepared by Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment dated March 2, 2014 was considered. Based on this note, the Cabinet decided to include Jats in the Central OBC list for reservation to appointments and admissions in states of Bihar, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan (Bharatpur and Dholpur), Uttarakhand, UP and Delhi.
The note suggested that the NCBC had asked the ICSSR to undertake an exercise to document the social, economic and educational status of Jat community vis-à-vis other communities yet not identified as backward classes. The ICSSR report concluded that in Haryana Jats lagged behind in school and higher educational enrolment, although they are financially well-off and occupy fair share in Government posts. In case of Delhi, research found the community to lag behind Gujjars in terms of social and educational standing. In UP, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, and Rajasthan, Jats lag behind educationally and in representation in Government services.
“Keeping above facts in view, Cabinet concluded that the advice rendered by NCBC did not adequately take into account the ground realties,” said the Cabinet note. The anti-reservation petitioners, represented by senior advocate KK Venugopal attacked the Centre for overlooking advice of its statutory body and relying instead on an “external” agency.
