New Delhi: The Supreme Court Tuesday August 23, 2011 in Writ Petition( Civil) no.337/2011, issued notices to the central and state governments on petition seeking exclusion of the "creamy layer" from the reserved category so that the most backward Dalits and tribals could get the benefits of reservation.
Petitioner O.P. Shukla Shukla who belongs to the Balmiki community, retired in 2009 from the income tax appellate tribunal as member-judicial, sought a review of the list of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes to ensure equitable distribution of benefits of reservation.The petition said the exclusion of the "creamy layer" from the reserved category was in tune with the recommendations of various commissions and committees set up for purpose and also the law laid down by the apex court.
The apex court bench of Justice R.V. Raveendran and Justice A.K. Patnaik issued the notices after senior counsel R. Venkataramani sought the defining of the power, scope, and ambit of Articles 341 and 342 of the constitution, that deal with the inclusion of a caste or tribe in the scheduled list.
However,the matter of introduction of "creamy layer" in SC ST has already been decided by the Apex Court in nine-Judge Constitution Bench, in the Indra Sawhney case (Mandal case), wherein it was held that the creamy layer restriction did not apply to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. In any case, a two Judge Bench could not overrule a nine-Judge Bench as the judgment in Indra Sawhney case was the law of the land, in the matter of creamy layer.
Click me to see copy of writ petition no.337/2011 filed by Mr. OP Shukla
Click me to see copy of writ petition no.337/2011 filed by Mr. OP Shukla
ITEM NO.86 REGISTRAR COURT.1 SECTION X
ReplyDeleteS U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO(s). 337 OF 2011
BEFORE THE REGISTRAR S.G. SHAH
O.P.SHUKLA Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(With appln(s) for impleadment as party respondent)
Date: 11/11/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.
For Petitioner(s)
Mr. Balaji Srinivasan,Adv.
For Respondent(s)
Mr. P. Nandu Aryan, Adv.
Mr. A. Subba Rao,Adv.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Nobody is present for the petitioner.
In the interest of justice, let there be a fresh
notice with dasti service upon all the unserved respondents
which is permitted to be served through the nearest Civil
Court/Trial court, where private parties are concerned and
through standing counsel, where state authorities are
concerned, if process fee and spare copies are paid/filed
before 22.11.2011, else list before the Hon'ble Judge in
Chambers for non-prosecution.
List again on 6.1.2012.
Served respondents may file counter affidavit till
then.
(S.G. SHAH)
REGISTRAR
rd