Supreme Court Agrees To Hear Challenge Against Madras HC Judgment Quashing 10.5% Vanniyar Reservation; Bars Further Appointments Or Admissions Under Quota

The Supreme Court on Thursday issued notice on a batch of special leave petitions filed against the Madras High Court's judgment which quashed the Tamil Nadu law providing internal reservation of 10.5 % to the Vanniyar Community and the 20% reservation to Most Backward Classes within the category of OBCs.

While posting the matters for final hearing on February 15, 2022, the Supreme Court observed that admissions or appointments already done under the said quota will not be disturbed.

However, no further appointments or admissions shall be done under the said quota till the matter is heard, the Court added.

A bench comprising Justice L Nageswara Rao, Justice BR Gavai and Justice BV Nagarathna was hearing a batch of petitions filed by the State of Tamil Nadu,  political party Pattali Makkal Katchi(PMK), and a few other individuals.

In its judgment delivered on November 4, 2021, a division bench of the Madras High Court had declared the  "Tamil Nadu Special Reservation of seats in Educational Institutions including Private Educational Institutions and appointments or posts in the services under the State within the Reservation for the Most Backward Classes and Denotified Communities Act, 2021" to be ultra-vires the Constitution.

Senior Advocate Dr.Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the State of Tamil Nadu, argued that Indira Sawhni judgment recognized the concept of sub-classification among backward classes.

Justice Rao then said that arguments have to be made on the point of the competence of the State Legislature to enact the law. The High Court had taken the view that after the 102nd Constitutional Amendment, the State Legislature lacked the competence to identify Socially and Educationally Backward Classes, and such power was vested with the President alone.

Justice Rao further said that the Court will not stay the High Court's judgment, but will pass an order for the interim arrangement as was done in the case of the Maratha quota case.

Senior Advocates Dushyant Dave, S Nagamuthu, Rakesh Dwivedi, P Wilson, Gopal Shankaranarayanan, Advocate Dama Sheshadri Naidu, Varun Chopra, Parthiban etc., appeared for the parties in the case.

The Madras High Court had observed that though the 105th Constitutional Amendment restored the power of States to identify SEBCs by nullifying the effect of the Maratha quota case judgment since the legislation was passed before the 105th amendment, the State lacked the competence for the same.

"We are of the opinion that the Constitution (102nd Amendment) Act, 2018, came into existence on 11.08.2018 and the Constitution (105th Amendment) Act, 2021, was enacted on 19.08.2021 and whereas the impugned Act 8 of 2021 came to be enacted on 26.02.2021 and therefore, we hold that as on the date of enactment of the impugned Act, the State Legislature has no power to enact such legislation and accordingly, the State Legislature has no competency to pass the impugned Act", a division bench comprising Justices M. Duraiswamy and K. Murali Shankar observed.

The High Court also held that the sub-classification in favour of Vanniyars was made solely on the basis of caste without any study or data on backwardness.

On August 25, 2021, the High Court had passed an interim order that every admission or appointment made under the quota will be subject to the final outcome of the challenge. The Supreme Court today observed that the same order will continue to operate during the pendency of the matter before it.

Click Here To Read/Download Order