Justice Aniruddha Bose Recuses From Hearing NLSIU Appeal Against Karnataka HC Order Quashing 25% Domicile Reservation
Justice Nageswara Rao has confirmed that the matter will be listed infront of a Bench that Justice Aniruddha Bose is not a part of.
Justice Aniruddha Bose of the Supreme Court on Monday recused himself from a matter pertaining to an appeal filed by the State of Karnataka against Karnataka High Court order which struck down the 25 percent Domicile Reservation at the National Law School of India University. "This will be listed before a Bench Justice Bose is not a part of", Justice Nageswara Rao informed. Earlier...
Justice Aniruddha Bose of the Supreme Court on Monday recused himself from a matter pertaining to an appeal filed by the State of Karnataka against Karnataka High Court order which struck down the 25 percent Domicile Reservation at the National Law School of India University.
"This will be listed before a Bench Justice Bose is not a part of", Justice Nageswara Rao informed.
Earlier in January this year, Justice UU Lalit had also decided to recuse from the matter as he had represented a member of the governing board previously.
On 29th September last year, a Bench of Justice B V Nagarathna and Justice Ravi V Hosmani of the High Court pronounced the order and said that,
"The amendment is ultra vires to the act. The State government has no State and has no direct say in the functioning of the law school. It is an autonomous institute and not aided by the state government."
The Bench also said that the Executive Council of the University has powers to introduce reservation and more importantly,
"If we allow this thing (state reservation) to be done virtually there will be two centres of control, one with executive council and other by state which will be an unhealthy trend."
The Bench noted that, "by the impugned amendment what is sought to be created is a state quota which is not permissible."
The Bench also stated as follows:
"NLSIU is on par with AIIMS, IIT and IIM, where there is no reservation quota.This law school is not on par with other law schools. Other schools are giving reservations, thus it is not necessary that Karnataka must also do it."
Moreover, comparing the reservation in NLSIU with other law schools, the bench has added that other law schools came up with reservations as students were not getting in NLSIU under the 80 seats quota.
The Bench rejected the argument of the State Government that the object of reservation was to retain talent in Karnataka. It responded that the Karnataka Students' aspiration cannot be said to be in Karnataka alone when opportunities are available overseas and India.
It was further suggested that the Executive Council of NLSIU may consider Reservation for Women and Economically Weaker Sections of Society at the law school.
The Court had concluded by saying that no scientific study has been conducted and that the reservation impact is contrary to what is the purpose of a law school. The impugned reservation was struck down as it does not meet the twin test of Article 14.
In March, the Karnataka State Assembly passed the National Law School Of India (Amendment) Act, 2020, which received the Karnataka Governor's assent on April 27. As per this amendment, NLSIU should reserve horizontally twenty-five percent of seats for 'students of Karnataka'.
The amendment inserted the following proviso in Section 4 of the National Law School of India Act :- "Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act and the regulations made thereunder, the school shall reserve horizontally twenty-five percent of seats for students of Karnataka."
As per the explanation of this Section, 'student of Karnataka' means a student who has studied in any one of the recognized educational institutions in the State for a period of not less than ten years preceding to the qualifying examination.