Reservations and Employment in iNdia
Government and public sector will hire job seekers based on reservation percentage from two different categories are 1: reservation category (SC, ST, OBC, EWC and other minorities) 2:Open category (General, SC, ST, OBC, EWC and other minorities).
In hiring Major priority given to reservation category including 33% reservation for Women, priority in hiring is given by Other Minorities women, ST women, SC women, ST Men, SC Men, OBC women, OBC Men, EWC Women, EWC Men and then after Open category Will be considered. Government and public sector hiring based on Merit in the open category and one more anomaly here i.e.,
Priority in hiring will be given by: Other Minorities women, ST women, SC women, ST Men, SC Men, OBC women, OBC Men, EWC Women, EWC Men and then General if they are equally eligible (for example having same marks or Rank). The landmark initiative of Special Recruitment for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe in Government jobs was started in Kerala in 1972 by Vella Eacharan.
The 1993 Supreme Court ruling in the Indra Sawhney & Others v. Union of India case said that reservations in job promotions are "unconstitutional" or not in accordance with the political constitution but allowed its continuation for five years.
In 1995, the 77th amendment to the Constitution was made to amend Article 16 before the five-year period expired to continue with reservations for SC/STs in promotions. It was further modified through the 85th amendment to give the benefit of consequential seniority to SC/ST candidates promoted by reservation.
The 81st amendment was made to the Constitution to permit the government to treat the backlog of reserved vacancies as a separate and distinct group, to which the ceiling of 50 per cent did not apply.
The 82nd amendment inserted a provision in Article 335 to enable states to give concessions to SC/ST candidates in the promotion.
The validity of all the above four amendments was challenged in the Supreme Court through various petitions clubbed together in M. Nagaraj & Others Vs. Union of India & Others, mainly on the ground that these altered the Basic Structure of the Constitution.
In 2006, the Supreme Court upheld the amendments but stipulated that the concerned state will have to show, in each case, the existence of "compelling reasons" - which include "backwardness", "inadequacy of representation" and overall "administrative efficiency - before making provisions for reservation.
The court further held that these provisions are merely enabling provisions. If a state government wishes to make provisions for a reservation to SC/STs in the promotion, the state has to collect quantifiable data showing the backwardness of the class and inadequacy of representation of that class.
In 2007, the Government of Uttar Pradesh introduced reservation in job promotions. However, citing the Supreme Court decision, the policy was ruled to be unconstitutional by the Allahabad High Court in 2011.
The decision was challenged in the Supreme Court, which upheld it in 2012 by rejecting the government's argument because it failed to furnish sufficient valid data to justify the move to promote employees on a caste basis.