The Supreme Court on Monday refused to stay the Andhra Pradesh HighCourt order that quashed 4.5 per cent sub-quota for minorities incentral educational institutions such as the IITs, and ticked offthe government for the way it had handled the "complex"and "sensitive" issue. The apex court expressed its "unhappiness" that theCentre was blaming the High Court when it had itself failed toproduce documents to support its case. A Bench of Justices K.S. Radhakrishnan and J.S. Khehar was criticalof the Ministry of Human Resource Development rushing to the apexcourt with the appeal against the May 28 order of the High Courtwithout documents to justify the policy of carving out 4.5 per centsub-quota within the 27 per cent OBC reservation. |
Without issuing any notice, the Bench asked Attorney-General G.E.Vahanvati to produce before it the supporting documents on theissue by Tuesday and posted the matter for hearing to Wednesday. The Bench said it cannot stay the High Court order "unlessthe government produces material to show a detailed exercise wasundertaken to carve out the sub-quota." The Attorney General started submissions by taking the "blameon his shoulders" for the outcome of the sub-quota policy inthe High Court by saying that the "argument was not the mostbrilliant." He sought some protection in view of the ongoing counselling forIITs for which 325 candidates had qualified for it under the 4.5per cent sub quota and their career and future could be jeopardisedif they are not allowed to appear for the counselling. When Mr. Vahanvati said there was need for some protection in viewof the ongoing counselling for IITs, the Bench said, "We willnot order stay." "First of all you have not produced any documents in the HighCourt. We would have been happy, if you had done so," theBench said.
The Bench wanted to know from Mr. Vahanvati as to what was thebasis and how did the government determine 4.5 per cent sub-quotafor minorities. When he sought to point out errors in the High Court order, theBench said it was natural for the High Court to ask questions onwhich the Centre was complaining. The Bench, which was not inagreement with Mr.
Vahanvati that the "High Court has gonecompletely wrong," said "when the December 22, 2011Office Memorandum (OM) (on 4.5 per cent sub-quota) reflectednothing, the High Court will ask questions." "Without placing documents, how can you find fault with theHigh Court [order]," the bench said adding that "whereis the material and the High Court says nothing is produced."When Mr. Vahanvati said the High Court also missed the 1993notification on caste identification, the Bench wanted to knowwhether it was placed before it or not.
The e-commerce company in China offers quality products such as Refrigeration Tube , China Condenser Tube, and more. For more , please visit Evaporator Tube today!
Related Articles -
Refrigeration Tube, China Condenser Tube,