New Delhi: In a major relief to the Mmata Banerjee government, the Supreme Court on Monday removed Calcutta HC on the implementation of the new list of OBC sub-groups, including 80 from the Muslim community, and said it is well decided that the executive could inform such a list without any law.On 17 June, HC stopped 140 sub-groups in the new OBC list entitled to quota benefits under OBC-A and OBC-B categories. The earlier list, which was killed by HC, had 113 OBC sub-group, with 77 and 36 others from the Muslim community. The Bengal government’s appeal is challenging the earlier list, which is still pending before SC.Looking at the state, senior advocate Kapil Sibal said that the migration has put the government in a position as it faces the task of recruiting 40,000 teachers and preparing a roster. A bench of Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice of Justice and NV Najaria said, “Prima Facial the HC order is wrong. A 9-judge Constitution Bench of SC has resolved the law and ruled that the list of sub-groups can be noted without a law to take advantage of the quota”.On a petition by an Amal Chandra Das, who challenged the new OBC list, an HC bench of Justice Tapebrata Chakraborty and Rajasekhar Mantha directed on 17 June that the operational notifications about OBC categories between May 8 and 13 will not be effective till 31 July.The SC bench said: “How is the notification without giving HC reasons? It is in the teeth of the decision of a constitution bench of SC. If you all agree, we can request the Chief Justice of HC to hand over the matter to a particular bench, who decide the issue on the hearing, and the qualifications.Looking at the petitioners, senior advocates Ranjit Kumar and Guru Krishna Kumar said that HC has not migrated on the implementation of OBC reservation on the basis of the list before 2010, which had 66 sub-group. “This is the state that has enacted a law to include the process for including and exclude sub-groups from the OBC list. Once the procedure is placed in the law, it should be clearly followed, which the government did not invite to live with HC,” he said. “The state law states that the State Backward Classes Commission is to be consulted, which was not done by the state. No survey was conducted to identify sub-groups that should be included. What he did was to resume the list of sub-groups, whose inclusion was already abolished by HC, “he held.On the other hand, Sibal said that a survey was conducted and 76 new sub-groups were added to the earlier list. The petitioner did not challenge the survey conducted for this purpose, he said.
