Is the Bombay high court above the Indian Constitution? Scheduled caste and scheduled tribe employees of Maharashtra’s judiciary feel that the answer to this question may be in the affirmative, given the court’s attitude regarding the implementation of the reservation policy.
For the last many decades, the court has turned its face against implementing the policy for judicial employees in the state. Positive discrimination in favour of weaker sections is provided under the Constitution and has been embodied in various policy resolutions adopted by the Central and state governments.
High Court opinion: The high court’s consistent position has been that the reservation policy, in terms of earmarking quotas in favour and other backward sections at the recruitment and promotion stages cannot be implemented in the state judiciary.
It was only in 1980 that the court wrote to district and sessions judges in the state urging them to reserve seats for the under-privileged in class Ill and IV posts. The circular mentioned that the question was raised in the state legislature and that the law-makers wanted to know why the policy was not implemented in the subordinate judiciary.
Barring the provision of reservations in the lower judiciary at the recruitment stage, the court has opposed the policy in case of promotions. In the high court itself, there are no reservations at both the recruitment and promotion stages. The maximum concession the court has made is to say that, both informally and in “spirit” it would implement the reservation policy, wherever possible, at the recruitment stage. (Times of India Sept. 17)
