This PIL challenged the omission to pursue O.B.C. reservation for the Maratha Community. The Court held the matter is exclusively executive and no writ lies, dismissing the petition. (Note: Subject tags approximate 'reservation' based on available enum options.
The PIL is dismissed as without merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.18 OF 2010
Indrajeet Vasantrao Suryavanshi ... Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra and others. ... Respondents
Mr.Raghavan Sarathy i/by M/s. Thodur Law Associates for the petitioner.
CORAM : J.N. PATEL, ACTING C.J. & B.R. GAVAI, J.
DATED : 4TH FEBRUARY, 2010
P.C.
The petitioner has filed the present PIL seeking writ directing the respondents to pursue the matter of granting O.B.C. reservation to the Maratha Community/Caste within the State of Maharashtra. As held by the Apex Court in the case of Indra Sawhney v. Union of India and others, reported in 1993 SC, 477, it is for the State to consider which backward communities are to be given the benefit of reservation of backward classes.
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
B.R. GAVAI, J.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ is maintainable for directing the State to pursue the grant of O.B.C. reservation to the Maratha Community.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Indra Sawhney v. Union of IndiaReferred¶8
1993 SC, 477
Indrajeet Vasantrao Suryavanshi
State of Maharashtra
J.N. PATEL
B.R. GAVAI
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
