Ashok Kumar Thakur V Uoi

INTRODUCTION

In April 2006, the Indian parliament passed a bill to bring out an amendment in the constitution to provide for nearly 27% reservation of seats for students from the ‘Other Backward Classes (OBC) segment in institutes of higher learning in India. This would have reduced the seats for a general, unreserved candidate to about 50% (after taking into account other reserved seats). The validity of the amendment was challenged on the grounds that the Union of India failed to perform the constitutional and legal duties toward the citizenry, and that the Act would have the effect of dividing the country on caste basis. It was alleged that the act would lead to chaos, confusion, and anarchy which would have destructive impact on the peaceful atmosphere in the educational and other institutions and would seriously affect social and communal harmony. The constitutional guarantee of equality and equal opportunity shall be seriously prejudiced.

India's Supreme Court ruled against the reservations on the Act on two grounds. First, it held that the exact proportion of OBCs in India's population was not accurately identified, but was based on projections made in 1978 by a specially appointed official commission (Mandal Commission). The Commission projected that 52% of the population belonged in the OBC category, but the Court found that the methodology used to reach this figure was flawed. Second, the Court held that setting quotas or reservations might not be an appropriate means of promoting diversity or affirmation action because it discriminates against "meritorious" candidates who do not suffer social disadvantage on account of caste, race or ethnicity.

ASHOK KUMAR THAKUR V UNION OF INDIA

Ashoka Kumar Thakur vs Union of India is an Indian public interest litigation case challenging the conclusion of the Mandal Commission that about 52% of the total population of India belonged to Other Backward Classes classification. The...