Karnataka’s increase in SC/ST quotas struck down for taking total reservation to 56%, beyond the 50% ceiling

Karnataka Act No. 1 of 2023 increased reservation for Scheduled Castes (SCs) from 15% to 17% and for Scheduled Tribes (STs) from 3% to 7%, while leaving the 32% reservation for other backward classes unchanged.

The aggregate reservation therefore rose from 50% to 56% in educational institutions and State services

One petition challenged the Act’s constitutional validity; the other challenged, among other matters, its application to recruitment to Assistant Engineer posts

The State relied on committee and commission reports, including the Nagamohan Das Commission Report, to support the increase

1. Whether the 50% ceiling on reservations under Articles 15(4) and 16(4) remained binding after the Constitution (One Hundred and Third Amendment) Act, 2019

2. Whether the State had established extraordinary circumstances permitting reservation above 50%

3. Whether the State’s reports and data established a lawful basis for the increase, including adequate representation and the applicable requirements under Articles 15(4) and 16(4)

4. Whether prior consultation with the National Commissions for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes was mandatory before enactment of the Act

Articles 14, 15(4) and 16(4) operate together as part of the constitutional equality scheme.

Under Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, reservations under Articles 15(4) and 16(4) are generally subject to a 50% ceiling; departure is confined to extraordinary situations, requiring a special case and extreme caution

M. Nagaraj v. Union of India confirms that quantifiable data concerning backwardness and inadequate representation does not displace the ceiling, and that reservation must not breach it absent a recognised exception

“Adequate representation” is not “proportionate representation”; population share alone does not determine the permissible reservation

The 50% ceiling applies to reservations in education under Article 15(4) as well as public employment under Article 16(4)

Article 338(9) and Article 338A(9) require consultation with the respective National Commissions on major policy matters affecting SCs and STs; that consultation must be meaningful and precede the decision

The Act raised total reservation to 56%, exceeding the ceiling affirmed in Indra Sawhney

The State’s reliance on population growth and representation below population proportions did not establish an extraordinary circumstance: the governing standard is adequate, not proportionate, representation, and the reports’ population-based approach was therefore insufficient

The Court also found that the Nagamohan Das Commission relied substantially on older data and the Ratnaprabha Committee’s material, which had been prepared in the context of promotional reservation; later State data showed SC and ST representation exceeding the existing reservation percentages in many departments

Even if data supported the State’s assessment of backwardness or representation, it could not by itself justify breaching the 50% ceiling

The Court rejected the argument that the 103rd Amendment displaced the ceiling, relying on Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India and the distinct basis of EWS reservations

It further held that prior consultation with the National Commissions was mandatory and that letters sent after enactment did not satisfy the requirement; however, it found it unnecessary to examine that ground further after concluding that the Act violated the equality guarantees

It struck down Section 3 of the Act insofar as it took aggregate reservation in educational institutions beyond that ceiling, holding it contrary to Articles 14 and 15; it also struck down Section 4 as contrary to Articles 14 and 16

The petitions were allowed in those terms