The Andhra Pradesh high court on Wednesday questioned the state government’s decision to provide 34% reservation to the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in local bodies, seeking the data and rationale behind the enhanced quota, people familiar with the matter said on Thursday.
High Court Orders State to Justify OBC Reservation Percentages
A division bench of the high court, led by Chief Justice Lisa Gill and Justice Challa Gunaranjan, has ordered the state municipal administration and panchayat raj departments to submit all pertinent details and statistical data that justify the 34% reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in local bodies. This directive follows an announcement by Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu on August 18, in which he stated that the government would implement a 34% reservation for OBCs in rural local bodies and 33.33% in urban local bodies. Naidu characterized this move as a significant step towards achieving political empowerment and social justice for backward communities.
Hearing arguments on two separate public interest litigation (PIL) petitions, the high court bench questioned the state government on the criteria and data used to arrive at the enhanced quota and asked how the government intended to justify its decision. It also sought an explanation on how the government had issued orders providing an enhanced quota for OBCs in local body elections based on a report of the dedicated commission headed by Rajiv Ranjan Mishra, when the report itself had reportedly not yet been formally approved by the government. The court further questioned the government’s decision not to make the data contained in the commission’s report public if the same statistics had been relied upon while finalising the reservations.
The announcement was made following a decision taken by the state cabinet earlier that day, endorsing the state government’s decision to enhance OBC reservations from 24.15% to 34% in local bodies.
The advocate general said the commission had made several recommendations and that the government had not yet taken any decision on formally approving those recommendations.
