UNION OF INDIA ETC. versus RAKESH KUMAR AND ORS., ETC.

UNION OF INDIA ETC. versus RAKESH KUMAR AND ORS., ETC.

Reservations of posts of Chairpersons and seats for Scheduled Tribes in Panchayats in Scheduled Areas, including those exceeding 50% and up to 80% aggregate, are constitutionally valid due to exceptional provisions under Article 243-M(4)(b); this policy represents compensatory discrimination justified by historical exclusion and is not an unreasonable restriction on political rights.

Parties
Appellant: Union of India; Respondents: Rakesh Kumar and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
appeals allowed
Legal Topics
Reservations, Scheduled Areas, Panchayats, Scheduled Tribes, Scheduled Castes, Affirmative Action
Constitutional Law Election Law Social Justice Reservations Scheduled Areas Panchayats Scheduled Tribes Scheduled Castes +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Union of India

Appellant

Rakesh Kumar and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Constitutional validity of reservation of posts of Chairpersons and seats for Scheduled Tribes in Panchayats in Scheduled Areas under PESA Act, 1996 and Jharkhand Panchayat Raj Act, 2001
  2. 2 Whether total reservations exceeding 50% in Scheduled Areas are permissible
  3. 3 Whether reservation policy violates rights of political participation of general category persons

Ratio Decidendi

Reservations of posts of Chairpersons and seats for Scheduled Tribes in Panchayats in Scheduled Areas, including those exceeding 50% and up to 80% aggregate, are constitutionally valid due to exceptional provisions under Article 243-M(4)(b); this policy represents compensatory discrimination justified by historical exclusion and is not an unreasonable restriction on political rights.

Court Disposition

appeals allowed

Orders

  • Second proviso to Section 4(g) of PESA Act and Sections 21(8), 40(8), 55(8), 17(8)(2), 36(8)(2), 51(8)(2) of Jharkhand Panchayat Raj Act, 2001 held constitutionally valid.
  • State Election Commission of Jharkhand directed to conduct elections for Panchayati Raj Institutions as early as possible.