New Delhi : The Centre on Monday asserted that by the 93rd Constitution Amendment Parliament could make special provisions in law for advancement of any socially and educationally backward citizen in admission to educational institutions.

In its application in the Supreme Court, seeking to vacate the March 29 interim order on the OBC quota, the Centre said the significance of the introduction of Article 15 (5) in the Constitution by the 93rd Amendment Act, 2005, was that it marked a departure from the previous approach to reservation inasmuch as it enabled the state to make special provisions by law for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward citizen by making special provisions for admission to educational institutions.

It said "a balance has been struck by Section 4 of the Act, which excludes the application of Section 3, inter alia, to institutions of excellence, research institutions and institutions of national and strategic importance specified in the Schedule of the Act." Further "the National Commission of Backward Classes (NCBC) was consulted by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment on revision of the OBC List. The Commission undertook the exercise in 2003 and advised the Government not to delete any of the castes/communities notified in the Central List. The Government accepted the advice given by the NCBC." The application said "Apart from this, there is a continuous and dynamic process of consideration of complaints of overinclusion or underinclusion under Section 9 of the National Commission of Backward Classes Act, 1993. The petitioners' submission that the Central Government List referred to in Section 2 (c) of the Backward Classes Act, 1993 and the definition of "other backward classes" in Section 2(g) of the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006 is static or based on outdated material is fundamentally erroneous."

The 1931 census was never the basis for identification of castes for inclusion in the lists of Socially and Educationally Backward Classes/OBC. The judgment in Indra Sawhney (Mandal) case rejected this argument, holding that the identification of socially and educationally backward classes by the Mandal Commission was based on the realities that prevailed in 1980 and not in 1931."

The Centre said the government consulted leaders of various political parties and it was concluded that a fresh census for identification of the OBCs would be pointless because it would only show that the OBC population was much more than 27 per cent.

Referring to the court's order that "nowhere else in the world is there competition to assert backwardness and then to claim we are more backward than you," the Centre said, "These observations appear to overlook the scheme in the National Backward Classes Commission Act, 2003, which provides for a permanent mechanism to examine any complaint of wrongful inclusion in the backward classes list and tender advice, ordinarily binding on the government."

While pleading for vacating the stay on the implementation of 27 per cent reservation for OBCs in elite educational institutions, the Centre wanted the matter referred to a Constitution Bench as important questions of law were involved.

© Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu