SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(P&H) 2960

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
S.S. Saron, Lisa Gill, JJ
Murari Lal Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Mukesh Verma, Mr. V.K. Jindal, Mr. Lal Bahadur Khowal, Ms. Janya Sirohi, Mr. P.R. Yadav, Mr. R.K. Chopra, Mr. Gaurav Sharma
For the Respondents: Mr. Jagdeep Dhankar, Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Mr. Surender Singh Pannu, Mr. R.S. Badhran, Mr. S.S. Nara, Mr. Ramesh Hooda, Mr. R.S. Kundu, Mr. Jasdev Singh Mehndiratta, Mr. Somvir Singh, Mr. Arun Gosain, Mr. Kamal Sharma, Mr. Gobind Sharma, Mr. Sanjeev Roy, Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Arya, Mr. Jasmer Singh Rozera, Mr. S.N. Yadav, Mr. Aditya Yadav, Mr. Shakti Singh

JUDGMENT

S.S. Saron, J.

This judgment and order will dispose of the above mentioned four writ petitions that have been filed which primarily seek the quashing and invalidation of Schedule-III (Backward Classes Block ‘C’) of the Haryana Backward Classes (Reservation in Services and Admission in Educational Institutions) Act, 2016 (Haryana Act No. 15 of 2016) (‘2016 Act’ - for short) stating the same to be contrary to the basic structure of the Constitution, ultra vires, contemptuous, arbitrary; besides, being null and void. . The Act was notified on 12.05.2016.

2. In Murari Lal Gupta’s case, it is inter alia stated that in terms of the impugned provisions of Schedule III of the 2016 Act, reservation to six castes, i.e. Jat, Jat Sikh, Ror, Bishnoi, Tyagi, Mulla Jat/Muslim Jat has been provided by declaring them as Backward Classes Block ‘C’. According to the petitioners, this reservation is without any valid and lawful basis, besides, being contrary to the Supreme Court judgment in Ram Singh and others v. Union of India , (2015) 4 SCC 697. The said provisions of Schedule III of the 2016 Act, in fact amount to circumventing the Supreme Court mandate in Ram Singh’s case (supra) which, it

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top